Why It Matters : Africa

Crimes in the Time of Cholera

Katie Paul — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:19:40 GMT

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe may be the only person left who denies that his country is spiraling out of control, but that hasn’t made it any easier to stop the mayhem. Tuesday, the U.N. reported that more than 2,000 people have perished in the cholera epidemic sweeping the country since August. Some 40,000 are infected, and the number of cases continues to rise exponentially. Worst of all, the complete collapse of the country’s basic infrastructure—water, sanitation, health care—has given rise to other diseases, including a particularly terrifying drug-resistant form of tuberculosis, which could easily turn an epidemic into a pandemic. Through it all, Mugabe has squandered aid money, chased out humanitarian groups, and suppressed information about the crisis.

That’s why U.S.-based group Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) upped the ante Tuesday, accusing Mugabe and his government of ‘crimes against humanity’ after collecting damning evidence on a fact-finding mission in December. They want the U.N. Security Council to see the health crisis as a threat to international peace and security, then swoop in and take over the health care system (with or without Mugabe’s blessing), and then refer the matter to the International Criminal Court for investigation. Fortunately for them, they have folks with serious street credit behind them—including Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former U.N. Chief Prosecutor Richard Goldstone, and former Irish President and OHCHR High Commissioner Mary Robinson.

The argument boils down to this: systematically denying people access to basic health care is not terribly different than holding guns to their heads. If so,they say, why not call upon the same international laws that are normally applied in conflict settings? The United Nations is then obliged to respond comparably in both scenarios—which means mobilizing an intervention akin to those dispatched to the war zones of Kosovo, Rwanda, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, and Darfur. If the argument works, it would expand the paradigm for invoking international human rights law. Why? See Exhibit A: the definition of ‘crimes against humanity’ in the Rome Treaty, which established the ICC back in 1998. The key clauses are highlighted here:

Article 7: Crimes against humanity

For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means anyof the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
(a) Murder;
(b) Extermination;
(c) Enslavement;
(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
(f) Torture;
(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious,gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;
(j) The crime of apartheid;
(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

What they would need to do is show that the actions—or lack thereof—that precipitated the health crises constitute an attack against the civilian population in and around Zimbabwe. In the chambers of the United Nations, that could be a tough sell. The only other time the Security Council has approached a health crisis as a threat to international security was back in 2000, when it issued a relatively mild statement of concern about the global AIDS epidemic. But signing off on a document filled with words like ‘requests,’‘encourages,’ and ‘interested Member States’ is a far cry from giving the United Nations the green light to take over a recalcitrant sovereign country’s health care system and put its leaders on trial.

Politically speaking, this is already an uphill battle. Naturally, Zimbabwe’s government is less than pleased, dismissing the group in characteristic anti-imperialist terms as a‘stupid, Western created organization.’ And the chances for success in leveling ICC charges against Mugabe and his thugs have more to do with politics in New York than in Harare. Even there, the PHR is up against the same familiar United Nations stalemate. An indignant China has long covered Mugabe’s back, despite years of damning evidence against him. Plus, the Security Council now has to contend with Uganda, which just took its place as a rotating member and pledged to back only the Southern African Development Community’s ~~impotent~~ ongoing negotiations.

But before you write off the PHR plan as hopeless idealism, consider this: though novel, their interpretation of international law is pure strategy. "The idea of ‘health’ is less politically charged," said Mary Robinson at a press gathering on Tuesday. "There are a lot of crises right now. The health prism is the way to get it into the Security Council and to get them to act on it." She has a point. No one has been able to take Mugabe down over shoddy elections, tortured journalists, or land seizures, even though those are also violations of international law, but framing his crimes in terms of health could potentially shame the Security Council’s stragglers into supporting the measures. After all, it’s tough for political figures to justify blocking medical care to innocents.

What do you international law gurus out there think? Without getting tangled in a debate about the merits and demerits of the "responsibility to protect," chew on this in the comments: a) does the argument hold water, and b) will the strategy work?

How (Not) to Deal with the Somali Pirates

Barrett Sheridan — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:30:28 GMT

By Barrett Sheridan

Last week, the world cheered a little when an Indian warship said it had encountered a Somali pirate “mother ship” in the Gulf of Aden and, after being fired upon, blew it to smithereens. International shippers needed a reason to celebrate. Earlier that week, Somali pirates had captured their biggest prize yet, a Saudi supertanker carrying $100 million of crude and, with nearly a hundred attempted hijackings so far this year, were making waters around the Horn of Africa about as welcoming as a bed of nails.

Well, now they can put away the champagne glasses. CNN is reporting that the sunken “mother ship” was actually a Thai fishing trawler and that, while pirates were in the process of commandeering it, the vessel still had 14 innocent fishermen onboard when the Indian Navy struck. One of them, a Cambodian, spent six days adrift before being rescued by a passing ship. (One other is confirmed dead; the rest are missing.) The sailor is now recovering in a Yemeni hospital, where he had the chance to inform the Indian Navy of its mistake.

The event underscores the difficulty of tracking pirates in waters where they easily blend in with fishing trawlers or other private watercraft. “The bulk of Somali coastal dwellers are still fishermen,” says Peter Lehr, a lecturer in terrorism studies at Scotland’s University of St. Andrews. “They are now caught in the fray and being attacked by western warships. How can you divide a real fisherman and a pirate from one another? They use the same vessels.”

That means recent military operations in the region—the European Union and NATO now have forces there—might not be a very adequate defense against the pirates. So what line of defense is left? The ships themselves. Armed guards aren’t an option, because they’re too expensive for ship owners, and firefights are risky onboard ships carrying two million barrels of flammable crude oil. But there are alternatives. Hanging barbed wire around a ship’s perimeter is a simple way to dissuade would-be boarders. Electrified fences also work, but they’re out of the question on ships carrying volatile cargoes. The Long-Range Acoustic Device, or LRAD, has become popular after it effectively repelled an attack on a cruise ship in 2005; it blasts a deafening wall of sound at targets up to 300 meters away. Fire hoses also do the trick at shorter ranges. Even simply gunning the engines and picking up speed can deter pirates, who look for easy prey.

It’s worth trying anything to avoid being taken hostage. Although the Somali pirates, which are currently holding 300 hostages, treat their captives fairly well—they are, after all, worth a lot of money to them—negotiations can last weeks or months. The MV Faina, a Ukrainian ship carrying 33 Soviet-made tanks, was captured in late September and is still being held in the port of Eyl, in the Puntland region of Somalia. “These guys are very patient people,” says Stephen Askins, a maritime lawyer at London firm Ince & Co. “One guy may be having a bad day and he’ll say, ‘I want $5 million,’ and the next guy might say, ‘Well, I’m a bit more reasonable than that.’ It’s not like buying a car. It’s a very long, drawn out process.”

Kenya: Things Will Never Be the Same

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:00:48 GMT

By Steve Bloomfield

Nairobi- Barack Obama’s victory was greeted with unbridled joy in Kenya, the east African country that has claimed him as one of their own. From the lakeside village where his late father grew up and many of his relatives still live, to the capital, Nairobi, Kenyans stayed up all night to watch the results, which were broadcast on state television. The victory celebrations, which began at 7am local time when the polls closed on the west coast, continued all day.

The new president’s step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, told reporters she might visit Washington for the inauguration but hoped that her life would not change too much.Despite visiting the country on just three occasions, Obama has become Kenya’s biggest star. His toothy grin beams out from the back of Nairobi’s matatus, the ramshackle 14-seater minivans used for public transport. Street hawkers peddle home-made Obama merchandise including t-shirts bearing the slogan ‘Yes we can’ and dollar bills emblazoned with the President-elect’s face.

The Kenyan government has sought to exploit Obama’s victory, announcing a national public holiday on Thursday. President Mwai Kibaki’s spokesman, Alfred Mutua, described the election as a “a defining moment in Kenya’s history and the history of the world. Things will never be the same again.”

Kenyans’ enthusiasm for Obama is not matched when it comes to their own politicians. Many of the current government have been accused of corruption, while some are thought to have been involved in orchestrating the post-election violence which killed 1,500 people at the start of the year. Ory Okolloh, a Kenyan blogger, said: “I hope the irony of our corrupt and selfish politicians declaring a public holiday to celebrate the virtues of Obama and his campaign is not lost on us as Kenyans.”

Obama’s father was a Luo, one of Kenya’s most marginalized tribes. Luo politicians have struggled to gain power and few believe Obama would have had much chance of becoming president of Kenya if he had been born here. The United States has elected a Luo president before Kenya—something that has not gone unnoticed by prominent Luo politicians here.

But Obama’s victory could change the way Kenyans view politics. Peter Gaithuma, a 40-year-old father of three from the market town of Kiambu in central Kenya, said the election of a minority candidate should teach Kenyans to ignore ethnic backgrounds when choosing their leaders. “Americans did not look at his race,” he said, “they looked at his leadership skills.” If Kenyans did the same, Gaithuma said, anyone could become president. “We can even have a Maasai president,” he said.

South Africa: Jubilation!

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:34:25 GMT

By Karen MacGregor

Durban - People across Africa danced with jubilation as Barack Obama swept to victory in yesterday’s remarkable election, and were moved to tears by the victory speech of the man who will soon become America’s first black president. From Cape Town to Timbuktu, people sat up overnight watching television and huddling around radios, or woke at dawn to learn that the man they claim as a son of Africa had become the worlds most powerful leader.

In Kenya, people celebrated in the streets of Nairobi and in the western village of Kogelo, home of Sarah Obama, grandmother of the man they consider a hero, and whose face graces billboards and busses. President Mwai Kibaki declared Thursday a public holiday so that people could celebrate the first Kenyan in the White House. “This is a momentous day not only in the history of the United States, but also for those living in Kenya,” Kibaki said.

People threw election parties around South Africa. In Johannesburg, an all-nighter organised by Americans in Africa for Obama drew 200 people and offered four big-screen televisions playing CNN, booze and breakfast, dance floors and music and Obama memorabilia. Given the crime rates in South Africa, security guards were on hand to keep order. “We had a great mix of people—Americans, South Africans and people from around Africa,” said co-organiser Nastasya Tay. “Obama’s speech was an oh-my-God moment. People wept and chanted, ‘Yes, we can’.” Although not part of the official Obama campaign, the non-profit Americans in Africa for Obama group has been active in several countries, fundraising and holding events in support of their candidate in much the same vein as volunteers back home.

South African President Kgalema Motlanthe said today that Africa stands proud of Obama. For millions of people particularly those of African descent, in Africa and in the Diaspora his victory represented “hope of change they can believe in.” The ruling African National Congress was confident the Obama administration would “work to strengthen ties between the United States and Africa, building on development initiatives already in place, and forging a genuine partnership to tackle challenges facing the continent,” said spokesperson Jessie Duarte in a statement.

See the full round-up of the world's reaction to the election of Barack Obama.

Doug Franke, vice-president of the local American Chamber of Commerce Doug, pointed out that both Obama and Joe Biden have said they see Africa as a key partner in the future. “So I think we have exciting times ahead of us.” Already, he told The Times newspaper, the U.S. gives $25 billion a year in aid, and democrats have indicated they would like to double the amount. “About a quarter of that goes to Sub-Saharan Africa. So South Africa should see an increase.” In terms of trade, last year more than 98 percent of South Africa’s exports to the U.S. were duty free, under the American Growth and Opportunities Act. “The doors are open for business with the States. With the Democratic Party in power we will have a new window of opportunity to relook at what other barriers there are.”

However, the expectations of African governments might be overblown, warned Tom Wheeler, a foreign policy research associate for the South African Institute of International Affairs at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. “There will be many calls on Obama’s time to deal with the financial crisis, Iraq, Afghanistan and a host of domestic issues. An Africa high on the agenda would be wishful thinking.” So while Obama is likely to be sympathetic towards Africa, he will struggle to deliver, Wheeler predicted: “Also, the Bush administration has been very generous to Africa, and I wonder how much more Obama will really be able to find to pour into Africa in financial terms.”

Africans might see Obama as the best chance yet of greater U.S. involvement with the world’s poorest continent, but the overwhelming response to his victory has been one of black pride. “People were watching TVlast night, and they are very happy that Obama won because hes a black man,” said Mdudusi Ndlovu, a personal assistant who lives in the sprawling suburb of Inanda outside Durban, South Africas second biggest city. “We are also happy for Kenya.”

Nobel laureate Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu likened the atmosphere following Obama’s victory to South Africa’s democratic transition. In a statement today he described the election as “an epoch-making event filling the whole world with hope that change is possible and boosting the confidence of people of color. We have a new spring in our walk and our shoulders are straighter. It is almost as when Nelson Mandela became President of South Africa in 1994,” Tutu added. Mandela said Obama’s victory demonstrated that anyone can “dare to dream of wanting to change the world for a better place.”

What the World Thinks of Barack Hussein Obama

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:24:09 GMT

By Barrett Sheridan and Fred Guterl

The most common reaction across the world to Barack Obama’s Tuesday night victory was a simple one: “Thank you.” It was a sentiment directed not at the president-elect himself, but at the American people. Having felt abandoned by the United States for so long, and especially after the 2004 reelection of George W. Bush, people across the world saw Obama’s victory as an affirmation that yes, America still does represent something special. Nelson Mandela, in a congratulatory letter to Obama, perhaps summed it up best: “Your victory has demonstrated that no person anywhere in the world should not dare to dream of wanting to change the world for a better place.” It was also a good excuse to celebrate. Kenya, the home of Obama’s father, declared a national holiday, and Brazilians proclaimed a new era of "esperanza". The few disappointed by the final tally—a dour-looking Tory in London, some security-conscious Israelis—did little to dampen the global celebration.

Parisians reacted with enthusiasm and relief to the news, some of them turning on a dime to become Amero-philes. The French newspapers, after 8 years of George W. Bush, might perhaps be forgiven for getting a little tipsy on Obama. Obama fervor reached South Asia, too, although the candidate's promise to follow terrorists into Pakistan with or without Islamabad's approval cooled the excitement of some there. In Iraq, everyday citizens have their doubts about what Obama means for peace in the country, but politicians agree that he is "presidential material." South Koreans struck a balance between pessimism and optimism; they worry over the future of a pending free trade deal with the U.S., but are encouraged by Obama's attitude towards negotiations with the pariah state to their north. In Japan, Obama's victory served to remind some voters of stagnation in their own domestic politics.

Our team of foreign correspondents has cavassed the globe for the morning-after reaction to this historic election. The event was cause for celebration and contemplation in London, Paris, Jerusalem, Seoul, Durban, Lahore, Baghdad, Tokyo, Russia and Rio.

Zimbabwe: Optimism and the Price of Bread

Scott Johnson — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:57:51 GMT

The price of a loaf of bread in Zimbabwe these days is 7.5 trillion dollars. That’s the good news: four days ago it was four times that much. Ever since news of the power-sharing accord between the 84-year old dictator Robert Mugabe (can we call him that anymore?) and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai last Monday, the effect on the nation's economy has been palpable. With the exception of fuel, prices of commodities on the black market have started to drop across the country in response to political stablization. Buoyed by the news, Zimbabweans enjoyed their first full day today getting used to the new 1000 Shilling note – a government attempt to normalize the 11 million percent inflation rate.

Whether the power-sharing accord will have the same effect on the political tensions as it has had on the economy remains to be seen. Mugabe, for one, clearly isn’t thrilled about the agreement. He called it a “humiliation” today. Nevertheless he signaled that it was necessary for his ruling ZANU-PF party to get fully behind it. (Theories as to why Mugabe agreed to share power abound; one holds that he was pressured by regional leaders; another holds that he has wanted to enter the arrangement but has felt contrained by his cohorts in the government.)

Everyone can agree on one thing -- it's going to be a long time before the country can begin to heal. “The objective here is democratization,” Nelson Chamisa, one of Tsvangirai’s spokesmen told me today. “It’s not an overnight project.” Luckily for Zimbabweans, the price of bread is working on a much more agreeable schedule.

Zuma's Cartoon Character

Barrett Sheridan — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 21:36:15 GMT

Journalists everywhere are lamenting the loss of profits and influence at some of the world's best papers. They might take some solace in the fact that printed cartoons, at least, still matter. The intentionally provocative Danish cartoons that depicted the prophet Mohammed unflatteringly stirred the Muslim world into riots and rampage. The United States proved it wasn't immune to animation anxiety when a satirical New Yorker cover depicting Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama as a secret Muslim caused an eruption of protest. The latest offender is a South African cartoonist named Zapiro, the pen name of Jonathan Shapiro. His most recent work shows Jacob Zuma, the leader of the African National Congress, preparing to rape a woman symbolizing the justice system. His most avid supporters are seen holding the victim in place and egging on their leader.

The cartoon, which appeared in Sunday's Times, has dominated the national discussion this week because of its close echoing of reality. Zuma has populist appeal -- he won the party leadership from president Thabo Mbeki last December by embracing leftist policies popular with the poor -- but is embroiled in conflict. In May, he was acquitted of raping a friend's HIV-positive daughter. To make matters worse, Zuma, who claimed the sex was consensual, admitted that he knew she had HIV, but neglected to use a condom anyway. He claimed that by taking a cold shower afterward, he didn't have to worry about contracting the virus.

Zuma is now on trial for corruption charges stemming from a controversial 1999 arms deal; if he's convicted, he'll be forced to drop out of the presidential election, which he's expected to win. Many have alleged that Zuma and his supporters are using their powers to influence the outcome. The leader of the ANC's Youth League, Julius Malema, vowed this week to "eliminate any force" blocking Zuma's path to the presidency. Although Zuma urged restraint on his followers, protests in support of him turned violent on Wednesday, with a mob of 3,000 in Durban throwing water bombs at police, who responded with rubber bullets and widespread arrests. It was the fear of this kind of activity that led to Sunday's cartoon. "I am outraged at what Jacob Zuma is trying to do to the justice system and constitutional principles," Zapiro told a South African radio station.

The court will decide on Friday whether Zuma's indictment was lawful, and the country is on edge. "I haven't heard of any kind of blockbuster evidence against him," says Edmond Keller, head of the political science department at UCLA and an expert on South Africa. "There's a good chance he'll get off." The only thing that's certain at this point is Zuma's political skill. His supporters, say Keller, are convinced that the corruption trial "is another case of people trying to bring him down" without cause. Princeton Lyman, a former U.S. ambassador to the country and now a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, puts it another way: "He's street smart." The Durban mobs seem to agree.

Piracy on the Rise in Sub -Saharan Africa

Newsweek — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 01:00:31 GMT

By Zachary Kussin

As Jason McClure writes in this week's magazine, piracy off the coast of Somalia has become a major maritime headache. Just last week, on Aug 20, another three vessels -- a Malaysian palm oil transport, a Japanese tanker, and a German cargo ship -- were hijacked. The machine gun-carrying pirates threatened uncooperative crewmembers with death, locked them up and steered the vessels to pirate bases on the northern Somali coast. Shortly thereafter, they began ransom negotiations with the ships' owners. The Gulf of Aden, which lies off Somalia and leads to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, is now considered to be the world's riskiest area for international shipping, according to the International Maritime Bureau, a non-profit organization dedicated to fighting marine crime. So far in 2008, 15 vessels have been hijacked off Somalia alone.

Lawlessness and heavy traffic -- 7.5 percent of world shipping passes through the Gulf each year -- makes the area a fat target for pirates. They can operate in Somalia's territorial waters with impunity. The Somali government, unable to patrol the Gulf on its own, asked the United Nations for help back in June, and the result was Resolution 1816, which allows the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Pakistan and Canada to help patrol the dangerous waters. The measure will help cargo containers and other commercial ships, of course, but its intended beneficiaries are the ships delivering humanitarian assistance to Somalia, which depends on food aid to feed close to three million of its desperately poor inhabitants.

The multilateral initiative hasn't lived up to expectations, however. In its three months on the job, the Canadian security contingent, which will head up the patrol until December, has helped prevent just two hijackings. And as of now, no naval force has agreed to take over from Canada once its six-month rotation is up. Pottengal Mukundan, the IMB's director, attributes the lack of participation "to items in other nations' foreign policy agendas, such as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which surpass piracy." For now, ship crews will have to keep rolling the dice, or avoid the Gulf of Aden altogether.

Somalia isn't the only high-risk area. The other coast of Africa sees its share of action too; 14 hijackings have taken place off Nigeria so far this year. Nigerian piracy, like Somalian, is fueled by large local militias, who turn to ocean marauding as a source of funding. The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), a militant group fighting to localize control of Nigeria's oil, is the largest offender. They send out armed gangs aboard small speedboats who violently force their way onto oil tankers and abduct crewmembers for ransom. Hijackings have been attributed to a decline in security throughout the Niger Delta region; the 14 hijackings so far this year is about on a par with 2007's 25 total attacks, and has already surpassed the 12 attacks in 2006.

What's needed, of course, are cops. The Strait of Malacca between Malaysia and Indonesia, once the riskiest stretch of water in Asia, now "sees less than a handful of attacks per year," says Mukundan. Hijackings have fallen steadily since the Indonesian navy began a concerted anti-piracy campaign five years ago. So far this year, only 11 on-board thefts have been reported. In Africa, weak regional governments aren't likely to be able to take such action to protect their waters anytime soon. Transport companies have turned to the United Nations and multilateral security operations to take their place, though results have fallen short of expectations.

Sudan: the International Court's Big Test

Newsweek — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:16:33 GMT

By Jonathan Tepperman

Since the International Criminal Court decided to indict Omar Hassan al-Bashir, the President of Sudan, for war crimes earlier this week, the chorus of criticism has grown deafening. Khartoum, with support from Beijing and Moscow, is outraged by what it sees as a flagrant invasion of Sudan’s sovereignty. U.N. and African Union bureaucrats and aid workers worry the charges will imperil the safety of peacekeepers and aid workers in the country (and with reason; AU troops there have increasingly become targets of late, scarcely able to protect themselves let alone the people of Darfur). Meanwhile, pundits opine that the indictment represents another instance of overreaching by an international body, and will make any peace settlement in Sudan even harder to achieve (by reducing Bashir’s incentives to cooperate). The old debate over whether it’s better to seek justice or peace (which may mean offering amnesty to the worst malefactors) has been taken up once more.

There are several problems with these arguments. As for sovereignty, that’s a nonstarter. Since Nuremberg, the international community has recognized that certain laws and norms have universal jurisdiction, applicable everywhere. And a new principle of international law adopted by the Security Council in 2006, known as the responsibility to protect, holds that local governments can now effectively default on their sovereignty when they egregiously abuse their own citizens--as Khartoum most certainly has. The case for overreaching is similarly thin. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the chief prosecutor of the ICC, is no cowboy, and didn’t undertake this indictment on his own initiative. He was doing his job. The Security Council itself (including Raussia and China) first ordered him to investigate the Sudanese government in 2005, and the indictment was a natural conclusion of that process.

The big question is whether the charges will make any difference in Sudan. In terms of the peacekeepers, the real problem is that most countries who have promised to send troops haven’t done so. It’s taken five years to deploy just 9,000 soldiers there, and those units are undermanned, underequipped and unable to function effectively. As for Bashir, this isn’t the first time a head of state has been indicted by an international tribunal--that precedent was set with Slobodan Milosevic and Charles Taylor. But the trick will be getting Bashir in the dock. Given Sudan’s record of defying the international community, that’s unlikely to happen short of regime change in Khartoum, which is also unlikely. Remember that Moreno-Ocampo has no police force to make arrests, and Russia and China will surely block any further action by the United Nations.

Will the indictment actually make things worse, however, by reducing the likelihood that Bashir will deal? Again that’s unclear, but it seems unlikely. First, remember that there currently is no peace process underway, so the charges won’t disrupt anything. Second, as Richard Goldstone, former prosecutor for the Yugoslav tribunal, argues, indictments during the Balkan wars in the 1990s actually made things easier by removing some of the most notorious hardliners from the bargaining table.

On balance the depressing reality is that the real impact of the indictment will probably be minimal, at least in the short term. And that could prove to be the real problem. While the charges won’t make things worse (or better) for the people of Sudan, the credibility of this fledgling court is on the line. If it flubs its first major case, that could have negative repercussions in similar instances of genocide and abuse further down the line. So the stakes are high; and while the outcome of the court case is far from clear, the circumstances don’t seem encouraging.

A Refugee in Holland

Newsweek — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:31:57 GMT

By Friso Endt

When Morgan Tsvangirai held a press conference on Sunday to announce that we was withdrawing from Zimbabwe’s presidential runoff election slated for Friday, he sat next to Dutch ambassador Jos Weterings. Afterwards Tsyangirai left in Weterings's car, flying Dutch flags, and rode straight to the embassy in Harrare, where the Dutch received him as a political refugee. “The Dutch embassy in Zimbabwe has been guaranteed by the authorities that our diplomatic immunity will be respected,” the embassy said in a statement. Tsvangirai said on Dutch radio early Tuesday morning that he feels “safe” and thanked the Dutch for their hospitality.

What happens next? Bert Koenders, the Dutch minister of “Overseas Development Policy,” expects Tsvangirai to ask for a United Nations investigation into who initiated the violence against voters and opposition members in Zimbabwe. He will also ask for help in insuring “honest organized elections” in Zimbabwe. According to Koenders, Tsvangirai’s decision to withdraw was intended to be an “instrument to empower international pressure at Mugabe.” Sources in The Hague say that the Dutch government had been meeting over the weekend to discuss the Zimbabwe problem and Tsvangirai’s request for asylum. The Dutch are said to have consulted the U.S. embassy in The Hague and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Washington, but neither the Dutch nor the U.S. embassy would confirm the rumors. On Tuesday morning Tsvangirai said in an interview with Dutch radio reporters that he expects that he can leave the embassy “soon”.

Keeping Watch Over Remote Uranium Reserves

Newsweek — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:03:53 GMT

by Andrew Ehrenkranz

Mukumbi, a desolate hive of straw huts, looks like a typical village in the Democratic Republic of Congo, one of the poorest countries in Africa. But a few kilometers down a red-dirt road lies a deposit of some of the purest uranium on the planet. The Shinkolobwe mines produced uranium for the first atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The mine has been closed for decades, but with soaring demand for uranium to power new nuclear reactors and build weapons, this resource is beginning to attract attention.

The United Nations and the U.S. government, among others, are concerned that uranium from the mines may wind up in the hands of terrorists or rogue nations who want the ore for weapons. Illegal artesian mining has long persisted in Shinkolobwe’s periphery, particularly for minerals like cobalt, copper, and coltan, increasingly in demand for mobile phones, electronics, and batteries. In recent years there have been reports of uranium being confiscated at neighboring borders that was ultimately traced to Shinkolobwe. This week there have been unconfirmed reports in Kinshasa that the government is seeking foreign help to re-open the mine.

The Congolese government appears to be keeping a tighter lid on the mine than it has in the past. On a recent visit to the area, I was met by a formidable Congolese military presence, who were under strict orders to prohibit any foreigner from coming within two kilometers of the mine’s perimeter. The well-armed soldiers were members of an elite unit within Kabila’s Presidential guard, and with bottled water and motorcycles, appeared better equipped to rough terrain in the region than the Congolese troops seen manning checkpoints and other security installations around the country.But firepower won't solve all of security problems in containing the uranium from Shinkolobwe. According to a security official in Congolese President Joseph Kabila’s office, who spoke on condition of anonymity, the main challenge to securing the region is locating all the uranium illegally mined in years of war before the the current government came to power. “If you know what you want, there are still people who know where to get [the] product,” said the source.

Kenya's Odinga Calls For Protests--To What End?

Silvia Spring — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:25:43 GMT

It's hard to tell what Raila Odinga was thinking yesterday when he called for a fresh round of protests in Kenya. Only hours earlier, the leader of the country's opposition party, the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), had announced that instead of further demonstrations, his new strategy would be to boycott companies associated with President Mwai Kibaki's party, which he accuses of rigging the Dec 27 presidential election. Last week's three days of ODM demonstrations were not as bad as many feared they would be. On Wednesday, Odinga's supporters formed groups of no more than a hundred in the capital; by Friday, ODM's presence on the streets was non-existent, largely due to the substantial police presence.

So then what's the point of more demonstrations? Besides the fact that, as ODM's director of communications recently told me, "Raila loves rallies," most likely, Odinga's aim at this point is simply to stay in the news. The image of CNN's Zain Verjee getting shot in the back by a tear gas canister on Wednesday, combined with reports of police brutality against unarmed civilians, is exactly the kind of coverage he hopes will encourage international pressure on Kibaki. Even his short-lived (and seemingly pointless) announcement that he would turn his focus to sabotaging Kibaki economically earned him a day of newspaper headlines. What he wants now is not to negotiate a peace agreement or compromise but a re-run of elections. (Kibaki has shown no indication he is even willing to consider this.) To Odinga's delight, neither Britain nor the U.S. has yet recognized Kibaki's government, and the European Union parliament has asked its members to suspend budgetary aid to the country—totalling $560 million over the next five years—until the conflict is resolved. But such publicity does not come cost-free for Kenyans. Odinga's main support comes from the poor—roughly half the county's population—but he doesn't appear to be able to control them. Political rallies seem easily to turn into opportunities for gangs to loot businesses and harass civilians. Under Kenya law, such protests are illegal, and the police are authorized to use force in the form of tear gar and even live rounds to break them up. At least 21 were killed during last week's protests.

In the Nairobi slum of Kibera, home to around 1 million people, residents appear tired of the clashes. When Raila drove through to wave at supporters yesterday, many hid in their homes, afraid his presence might spark further fracas. Local resident Mary Kitamu, a round-faced woman with hair cut short to her ears, told me that even though she voted for Odinga, she believes the protests he is now calling for now are no good. "Rallies should be stopped," she says. "They only lead to more vandalism."Echoing a similar sentiment, a BBC World Service listener recently sent an SMS message to the station quoting a Kenyan saying: when two bulls fight, it is only the grass that suffers. Kenyans may not be willing to suffer indefinitely. At some point soon, both Odinga and Kibaki will have to stop clashing in front of the cameras and start negotiating.

A New Nobel?

Stryker McGuire — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:43:04 GMT

In London today former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan named the first recipient of the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership. Jenna Crombie of Newsweek's London bureau was present for the announcement. Her report:

No doubt by now, the former President of Mozambique will have heard the good news. This morning former U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan announced that Joaquim Chissano, who led Mozambique between 1986 and 2005, was the first winner of the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership. Annan, chair of the Prize Committee, praised Chissano’s successes in reducing poverty levels, encouraging peace and reconciliation in wake of the ravages of civil war and in boosting the economy of his southern African nation during his two terms in office. Annan said he hoped this award would serve to celebrate good African governance and shed light upon the emergence of conscientious leaders.

The prize of $5 million dollars over 10 years, followed by $200,000 annually for the rest of the recipient’s lifetime, is the largest philanthropic award of its kind. Ibrahim, 61, a successful Sudanese businessman who sold the telecom company he created in 2005 for $3.4 billion, is putting up the funds. He is hopeful that one day the recognition of the award will, like the Nobels, be of greater value than the substantial monetary prize.

But even as members of the diplomatic and international communities learned of his win, Chissano was none the wiser. As Annan made the announcement, he revealed that he was racing to get the news to the Mozambican ahead of the media. It's not yet clear if Annan won that race--but however Chissano heard, it could only have been a welcome 68th birthday gift for the former president.

Biofuels: good for the environment, not great for food aid in Africa

Silvia Spring — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:09:25 GMT

Biofuels are not short of fans. Made from crops maize, sugarcane and rapeseed, they make environmentalists happy because they help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by offering an alternative to conventional transport fuels. But their growing popularity is a cause for concern among African recipients of food aid, most of whom would rather eat maize than see it converted into ethanol.

Over the past three years, venture capital investment in biofuels has increased 800 percent, and the International Energy Agency predicts that production will double by 2011. In the U.S., for example, this has meant a 300 percent increase in the amount of maize used to produce ethanol since 2001. And Africa itself has increased ethanol production from 100 million gallons in 2006 to over 160 million this year.

All this has some humanitarian aid agencies nervous. While biofuels aren't entirely to blame, they have played a part in pushing up the price of maize across sub-Saharan Africa. In South Africa, for example, the price of white maize has jumped 186 percent over the past two years, up to $245 per metric ton. As a result, humanitarian groups can no longer rely on it as a main supplier. This comes at a tough time for southern Africa: the size of what the UN terms the "food-insecure population" has doubled in South Africa in the past year, and there are food shortages in Swaziland, Zimbabwe and Mozambique. The World Food Programme is now scrambling to procure maize from Malawi, which can offer it for less--around $180 per metric ton. But if estimates for biofuel demands are accurate, Malawian prices won't stay low for long.

Offering Anti-Gay Priests a Third Way

Silvia Spring — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:41:46 GMT

Not everyone was celebrating when Bill Murdoch and Bill Atwood were consecrated as Anglican bishops on Thursday at Nairobi's All Saints Cathedral. Well, certainly not anyone in favor of a united Anglican Commune anyway. The two American priests' decision to become bishops in Kenya signals not only their opposition to gays in the episcopal hierarchy but also a deepening division in the already fragile Anglican Church between its conservative African and liberal American branches, which have rowed ever since the U.S. consecrated its first openly gay bishop, Gene Robinson, in 2003. Even at the consecration, there was no mistaking exactly what had motivated the American priests to travel to Africa. Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi said of gays, "We need to love them we need to preach to them, but not to make them lay readers, pastors, bishops."

Murdock and Atwood are not the first to defect to African congregations in protest against the American church's ordination of gay priests. Rwanda has ordained six Americans so far, Nigeria one and Uganda will ordain its first on Sunday. Though the bishops will return to oversee congregations in the U.S., they will report solely to African Archbishops. While this might not mean the end of the Anglican Church, it certainly represents a shift in momentum to an alternative power base away from the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the spiritual head of the Anglican Commune, who has had little luck keeping the peace during this debate.

Africans are more than happy to be on the receiving end of this power shift. Commentators here pointed to Thursday's ceremony as evidence that, despite being a poor continent, it serves as a beacon for morality and spiritual solace for the rest of the world. The Anglican Church in Africa is not pleased with its American branch. At a key meeting in Tanzania in February, bishops called for Americans to end the appointment of gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex couples, demanding a response by September 30.

They aren't likely to be happy with what they hear back. As recently as Tuesday the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago nominated a lesbian priest to be a bishop -- which seems clear evidence that Murdoch and Atwood's efforts will do little to counter the acceptance of homosexual priests in the U.S. If the Anglican Church does eventually split into two distinct branches, there may be little love lost.