Guinea Junta Defiant Over Letting Conde Leave Country

Guinea’s junta has said it will not bow to pressure from West African leaders to allow ousted President Alpha Conde to leave the country.

Dozens of Guineans protested against sanctions levelled against their country as two West African presidents arrived for talks with coup leaders on Friday (September 17).

One sign says ECOWAS, that’s West Africa’s main regional bloc, “doesn’t decide for us”.

But it wasn’t only outside the airport in the capital Conakry where defiance was on show.

On Thursday (September 16), ECOWAS agreed to freeze the financial assets of the junta and their relatives, and bar them from traveling.

The next day presidents Alassane Ouattara of Ivory Coast and Ghana’s Nana Akufo-Addo arrived in Guinea.

They were asking for Conde’s release.

But on state television the junta, which seized power two weeks ago, said: “The former president is and remains in Guinea. We will not yield to any pressure.”

After talks with coup leader Colonel Mamady Doumbouya, Akufo-Addo said they had held “honest, brotherly meetings” and that he was confident Guinea and ECOWAS would find a way to “walk together.”

Source: Voice of America

The “Needy and Less Capable” African

Recently, Eritrea Profile began publishing a new series of articles under the banner, “#UnderstandingEritrea”. Broadly, the series aims to clarify and help shed further light on some of the most critical elements of Eritrea’s national development plans, such as the improvement, preservation, and sustainable use of its land and water resources. Thus far, the articles featured within the series have been enlightening and several readers have commented that they have learned a great deal about some amazing and exciting development projects. In the last issue of Eritrea Profile (published on Saturday 12 September), the article that was featured as part of the #UnderstandingEritrea series described the process of how some of the large dams in the country were actually developed, charting their path from initial ideas and early blueprints to the construction phase and then full service. While the article was informative and full of detail, mirroring those published previously, one point mentioned by the author especially piqued my interest and is worth further discussion. Specifically, the author explained how some of the dams (and other development projects in the country) have been the target of misinformation, condescending narratives, baseless criticisms, and unsubstantiated claims from abroad. What gives?

There is little doubt that a lot of this can simply be attributed to sheer ignorance and a general lack of understanding. Hence, the great value and necessity of the #UnderstandingEritrea series, which mainly seeks to provide clarity and promote greater understanding. However, there are also several other troubling factors underlying much of the misinformation, baseless criticisms, and unsubstantiated claims: racism and deep arrogance.

Unfortunately, although it is the year 2020, and one would expect much, much better, in many parts of the world, but particularly in the West, there are some that are simply unable to accept the basic fact that Africans, and those from

the developing world more broadly, have agency and they can – actually often do – find creative answers, develop effective solutions, and produce things of considerable merit. There is a narrow-minded, and flatly wrong, conventional wisdom that no problems can be solved, that no challenges or obstacles can be surmounted, that no true progress can be made, unless it is the West that is doing the planning, leading, directing, and implementing.

This mentality is, of course, not new. It can be traced back centuries, representing a part of Western schools of thought and serving to undergird and legitimize colonialism, imperialism, and slavery. Writing in the second half of the 18th century, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant contended: “The Negroes of Africa have received from nature no intelligence that rises above the foolish. The difference between the two races is thus a substantial one: it appears to be just as great in respect to the faculties of the mind as in color.” Similarly, in the same century, the French philosopher Voltaire claimed: “If their [Africans] understanding is not of a different nature from ours, it is at least greatly inferior. They are not capable of any great application or association of ideas, and seem formed neither in the advantages nor the abuses of our philosophy.” Meanwhile, David Hume, the Scottish philosopher and historian, also regarded Africans as an inferior race: “I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilised nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences.”

Over subsequent centuries, this racist, arrogant, “nothing good can come out of Africa” mindset proved to be highly resilient. Today, it can still be found, if not clear, outright, and overt then flowing just under the surface, within a broad array of disciplines and areas, including academia, economics and international development, world politics, international relations, media, and journalism, among others. It is obvious, for instance, in Western academic assumptions that what is said in Euro-American universities is only what has been said or only what matters (Davies 1994). It is also on display when an all non-African panel of “experts” or a non-African journalist, often having never set foot on the continent or when having done so not venturing too far from the comfortable confines of the local air-conditioned, five star hotel, will “Africasplain” something about Africa to Africans in a condescending, patronizing manner.

A young, low-income, African developing country, Eritrea faces numerous challenges within many different areas. However, it also remains proud and unbowed, and it has long striven to strike an independent, self-reliant path. It seeks genuine partnerships with all and is fiercely protective of its independence and sovereignty. The country also retains close control of its development agenda. It is thus relatively easy to understand how for those steeped in arrogance and racism, who remain possessed by a messianic conception of themselves as the saviors of the world and the inferiority of Africans, Eritrea is a target for criticism.

The country’s initial independence and continued sovereign existence vexes those who worked tirelessly against that outcome and grates those experts who confidently told all that it would be a weak, needy, unviable entity. The country’s desire to be self-reliant pushes back against the misguided notion that Africans are passive and absolutely dependent on outside help. Its noble desire to be independent also puts it at fundamental odds with those who have long been used to the paternalistic approach of monopolizing control over resources, imposing conditionalities, driving programs, and possessing inordinate influence over strategy in developing countries. Anything positive that Eritrea manages to achieve or produce – such as constructing effective development projects that are positively transforming communities – poses a challenge for those who believe that Africans are somehow inherently and naturally less capable.

That is why biased reports and stories over-report, sensationalize, or exaggerate “negative” aspects about Eritrea and underreport challenges, ignore context, and downplay, dismiss, or overlook “positive” developments in the country. And that’s why transformational dams, planned by creative, local experts, constructed through the sweat and tireless efforts of so many Eritreans, and happily rejoiced by many locals for having brought about an array of tremendously positive changes to their standard of living, can be arrogantly criticized and dismissed by those without a clue thousands of miles away.

Instead of continuing with assertions that are not grounded in any observable reality, or the promotion of condescending, paternalistic narratives rooted in arrogance and racism, the significant advancements and important progress Eritrea has made in many sectors should be recognized.

Source: Ministry of Information Eritrea

AtlanticCouncil.org: Biden finally gets bold on Ethiopia. But will it bring Peace?

A woman carries an infant as she queues in line for food at the Tsehaye primary school, which was turned into a temporary shelter for people displaced by conflict, in the town of Shire, Tigray region, Ethiopia, on March 15, 2021. Photo by Baz Ratner/Reuters.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

For months, the Biden administration warned that it would sanction the Ethiopian government and its allies for the human-rights abuses, war crimes, and other mass atrocities they have allegedly committed in their year-long war with the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF). As the nationalist group has carried out its own reprisal killings, those warnings have expanded to include all parties to a conflict that’s left thousands dead and nearly one million people languishing in famine-like conditions.

Then came today’s executive order—the latest in a long series of escalatory efforts by the White House to push the belligerents toward ceasefire talks and to allow in humanitarian aid. Repeated press statements expressing the administration’s “grave concern” looked more like platitudes than policy, which is why it faced increasing pressure from human-rights activists to act.

The administration chose to issue what the Treasury Department calls an “empty EO,” meaning a sanctions regime is now in place but the executive order does not designate any individuals or companies. Instead, the Biden team has launched its final and most elaborate warning shot, effectively giving both sides a few more weeks to engage in serious negotiations, cease their attacks on civilians, and open up the free flow of humanitarian assistance before sanctions are imposed. US officials have been clear to say that designations will come “in weeks not months” if progress isn’t made quickly.

The order goes further than sanctioning only human-rights offenses, as is allowed under the Global Magnitsky Act. Instead, the order is purpose-built to create a sanctions regime specific to the conflict in Ethiopia, giving the administration broad authority to target asset freezes at not just those committing rights abuses, but also those blocking humanitarian aid, inhibiting ceasefire negotiations, undermining democratic processes, engaging in corruption, and targeting civilians and international aid workers.

While we don’t know who will be targeted, it will likely include a representative sample of all the warring sides, including Ethiopian and Eritrean government officials, Amhara state representatives and militia leaders, as well as Tigrayan political and military figures.

• Abiy under fire?

If the United States chooses to sanction Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and his close associates before his expected reappointment as prime minister in the coming weeks, it could plant serious doubt about his leadership in the minds of his supporters. Such a move—though it’s unlikely—would probably also be met with renewed accusations that the United States was meddling in Ethiopia’s internal political affairs and effectively seeking regime change.

Because Washington has been accused of taking sides against Addis Ababa, today’s order takes great pains to appear even-handed by recognizing the complicity of all sides in committing rights abuses and prolonging the conflict. The order singles out not just Ethiopian and Eritrean government officials but also “the TPLF, the Amhara regional government or the Amhara regional or irregular forces,” essentially any party alleged to have committed abuses to date.

In a smart move, the administration also rolled out wide carveouts to those sanctions for “personal remittances to non-sanctioned persons, humanitarian assistance to at-risk populations, and longer-term assistance programs and commercial activities that address basic human needs.” That suggests it has learned from past cases, in which broad unintended consequences followed sanctions by hurting civilians.

Beyond the direct effect of sanctions, the reputational effect associated with them will also likely be substantial. Ethiopia will now be associated with neighbors such South Sudan and the Central African Republic on the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) list of sanctioned countries—company it will surely not want to keep when just two years ago it found itself on a very different list: the International Monetary Fund’s ranking of the world’s fastest-growing economies.

Although today’s announcement is a serious step forward on pressuring the Abiy government, it still leaves open the possibility that progress on the ground can be made over the next several weeks and that the worst of Washington’s sanctions can be avoided.

• Timing is everything

As fighting has become increasingly widespread over the last few months, many fear the war could quickly escalate and get dramatically worse for non-combatants, who have borne the brunt of the violence.

Moreover, East Africa’s rainy season will end in a few weeks, allowing for heavy weapons and larger troop deployments to wider, previously unreachable swaths of the country. While the TPLF currently appears to be on its back foot, the coming start of the dry season will level the battlefield once again. US officials estimate that all sides are preparing major new offenses next month.

Ethiopia will also be concluding parliamentary elections, which were delayed this summer in several regions due to the fighting. This will be followed almost immediately by a party congress for Abiy’s Prosperity Party, which he hopes will not only renew his mandate but also give him support to press forward with the war. To that end, the Biden administration’s order leaves Abiy with a choice: Use that new mandate to push for total victory, or initiate some type of political settlement.

Lastly, coming just days before the start of the United Nations General Assembly—and as former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo heads to Ethiopia as the African Union’s new Horn of Africa envoy—today’s effort could catalyze a new and concerted international diplomatic push for ending the fighting.

All sides have expected this announcement for some time. Still, US-Ethiopia relations are sure to nosedive even further as a result. Just hours after today’s sanctions announcement, Abiy issued an open letter to US President Joe Biden in which he stridently proclaimed that “Ethiopia will not succumb to consequences of pressure engineered by disgruntled individuals.”

However, viewed from Washington, diplomacy alone hasn’t worked either. The question is whether Abiy will see this latest move from Washington as the end of the road—or as an exit ramp to avoiding even greater pain.

•> Cameron Hudson is a nonresident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Africa Center. Previously he served as the chief of staff to the special envoy for Sudan and as director for African Affairs on the National Security Council in the George W. Bush administration. Follow him on Twitter @_hudson

Source: Dehai Eritrea Online