by Eze Eluchie
For decades, the practice of foreign interference in the
domestic affairs of other independent countries had assumed the status of an
international norm, despite repeated protestation by all countries that they
refrain from such interference.
Weaker and less economically endowed countries more easily capitulate under interference from stronger and more financially affluent countries. Nowhere has foreign interference in the affairs of other countries had greater dire consequences for the populace than in sub-Saharan African States and now in North Africa.
Decades after mostly cosmetic political 'independence', most countries in the African continent are ruled by proxies of foreign powers or lackeys who would rather pander to the desires of their external paymasters than hearken to the needs of their peoples. Foreign governments, in one breath pontificate on issues of democracy, good governance, 'anti-corruption initiatives’, and respect for territorial integrity and sovereign rights of States, whilst at the same time, supporting and propping up dictators, sociopaths, kleptocrats and sadists to rule over countries where they may have interests.
The practice of imposition of rulers preferred by foreign powers for emerging countries attained its height during the cold war era and was more rampant in mineral rich countries. Coup d’etats and often times, outright murder of progressively minded heads of governments was common place. Some of the victims of this dastard practice included Patrice Émery Lumumba (of Democratic Republic of Congo), Thomas Sankara (of Burkina Faso) and Murtala Mohammed (of Nigeria). In replacement, rulers of clearly deranged mentality, without any ideas as to how to move their countries forward were imposed as infamously represented in the case of DRC Congo, by the imposition of Mobutu Sese Seko – a classic case of an imbecilic nitwit.
With the expiry of the ‘cold war’ and the onset of a ‘new world order’, which touts intolerance of Military intervention in democratic governments, the pattern of imposition merely changed, with resort to the use of (s)election processes as a ruse to impose lackeys. Elections Observers/Monitors became a covert way to impose candidates. When a candidate that is deemed not ‘conducive’ is on the path of emerging victorious, announcements are made to the effect that the political process is ‘irredeemably flawed and not likely to be free and fair’. With exactly the same processes and circumstances in a polity where a ‘preferred’ candidate is ‘programmed’ to emerge, the announcements quickly change to ‘there are problems with the process, but they are isolated and not likely to adversely impact the free and fair nature of the elections’. Gosh!
Once in every long while, a candidate deemed ‘not conducive’ will slip through the well guarded sieve and thus leave the powers that be with no other option than to use a military coup and or ‘civilian’ uprising to ensure the ‘cleansing’ of the polity and installation of a ‘preferred candidate’. The 1992 Algerian military coup organized to oust the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS - Front Islamique du Salut)) from power and deny the FIS its electoral victories is again a classical example of instigated coups.
With the generalized abhorrence for military intervention in political settings, it has become unfashionable and inelegant to support a ‘military coup’ per se. So rather than refer to a take-over of a democratically government as a coup: call out the population to express support for the military take over, and pronto, a ‘military coup’ becomes a ‘civilian revolution’!! Great thinking!!
But there will be consequences.
History and modern efforts at combating extremism, has proved severally, that it is always better to have a definitive idea of your foes, where, who and how s/he is and be able to engage in some form of meaningful dialogue with such foes, than to have to contend with thin air. As a party in government, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood party was beginning to exhibit early tendencies of scuttling the intendments and achievements of the Egyptian revolution and curb freedoms of Egyptians whilst enforcing fundamentalist Islamist ideology on Egyptians. Other forms of pressure could have been applied to check such descent. The military coup (or rather ‘uncoup, since most governments have refrained from referring to what took place in Egypt as a coup), will be ultimately counter-productive and further fan the embers of radical extremism. With the present crackdown and violence, the Muslim Brotherhood will become like 'thin air'.
As the members of the fundamentalist Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Party are hunted down, massacred and imprisoned by Egyptian security forces in the streets of several Egyptian cities, and trumped up charges are levied against President Mohammed Morsi, one does not need to look too far into the crystal ball to realize that the thirst for revenge, an integral part of Arabia culture, will in due course set in. For each member of the Brotherhood that falls to the bullets of Egyptian security forces, over 50 arch extremists would have been created – who are willing to cause harm to others, perceived as collaborating to cause the present crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood.
As Egyptian military strongman, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, and his henchmen turn Nasr City into Egypt’s Tiananmen Square, one cannot but wonder if an opportunity to engage in dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood has been irretrievably wasted?
After over 10 years of combating the Taliban’s and hundreds of thousands of lives wasted in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, there is now resort to dialogue – how many will be wasted before the resort to dialogue in this instance.
When the reprisals begin, would the redefining of what constitutes a coup, as is now taking place in Egypt, have been worth it?
So sad.
Picture: Violence in Egyptian streets as troops open fire on supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood
Weaker and less economically endowed countries more easily capitulate under interference from stronger and more financially affluent countries. Nowhere has foreign interference in the affairs of other countries had greater dire consequences for the populace than in sub-Saharan African States and now in North Africa.
Decades after mostly cosmetic political 'independence', most countries in the African continent are ruled by proxies of foreign powers or lackeys who would rather pander to the desires of their external paymasters than hearken to the needs of their peoples. Foreign governments, in one breath pontificate on issues of democracy, good governance, 'anti-corruption initiatives’, and respect for territorial integrity and sovereign rights of States, whilst at the same time, supporting and propping up dictators, sociopaths, kleptocrats and sadists to rule over countries where they may have interests.
The practice of imposition of rulers preferred by foreign powers for emerging countries attained its height during the cold war era and was more rampant in mineral rich countries. Coup d’etats and often times, outright murder of progressively minded heads of governments was common place. Some of the victims of this dastard practice included Patrice Émery Lumumba (of Democratic Republic of Congo), Thomas Sankara (of Burkina Faso) and Murtala Mohammed (of Nigeria). In replacement, rulers of clearly deranged mentality, without any ideas as to how to move their countries forward were imposed as infamously represented in the case of DRC Congo, by the imposition of Mobutu Sese Seko – a classic case of an imbecilic nitwit.
With the expiry of the ‘cold war’ and the onset of a ‘new world order’, which touts intolerance of Military intervention in democratic governments, the pattern of imposition merely changed, with resort to the use of (s)election processes as a ruse to impose lackeys. Elections Observers/Monitors became a covert way to impose candidates. When a candidate that is deemed not ‘conducive’ is on the path of emerging victorious, announcements are made to the effect that the political process is ‘irredeemably flawed and not likely to be free and fair’. With exactly the same processes and circumstances in a polity where a ‘preferred’ candidate is ‘programmed’ to emerge, the announcements quickly change to ‘there are problems with the process, but they are isolated and not likely to adversely impact the free and fair nature of the elections’. Gosh!
Once in every long while, a candidate deemed ‘not conducive’ will slip through the well guarded sieve and thus leave the powers that be with no other option than to use a military coup and or ‘civilian’ uprising to ensure the ‘cleansing’ of the polity and installation of a ‘preferred candidate’. The 1992 Algerian military coup organized to oust the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS - Front Islamique du Salut)) from power and deny the FIS its electoral victories is again a classical example of instigated coups.
With the generalized abhorrence for military intervention in political settings, it has become unfashionable and inelegant to support a ‘military coup’ per se. So rather than refer to a take-over of a democratically government as a coup: call out the population to express support for the military take over, and pronto, a ‘military coup’ becomes a ‘civilian revolution’!! Great thinking!!
But there will be consequences.
History and modern efforts at combating extremism, has proved severally, that it is always better to have a definitive idea of your foes, where, who and how s/he is and be able to engage in some form of meaningful dialogue with such foes, than to have to contend with thin air. As a party in government, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood party was beginning to exhibit early tendencies of scuttling the intendments and achievements of the Egyptian revolution and curb freedoms of Egyptians whilst enforcing fundamentalist Islamist ideology on Egyptians. Other forms of pressure could have been applied to check such descent. The military coup (or rather ‘uncoup, since most governments have refrained from referring to what took place in Egypt as a coup), will be ultimately counter-productive and further fan the embers of radical extremism. With the present crackdown and violence, the Muslim Brotherhood will become like 'thin air'.
As the members of the fundamentalist Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Party are hunted down, massacred and imprisoned by Egyptian security forces in the streets of several Egyptian cities, and trumped up charges are levied against President Mohammed Morsi, one does not need to look too far into the crystal ball to realize that the thirst for revenge, an integral part of Arabia culture, will in due course set in. For each member of the Brotherhood that falls to the bullets of Egyptian security forces, over 50 arch extremists would have been created – who are willing to cause harm to others, perceived as collaborating to cause the present crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood.
As Egyptian military strongman, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, and his henchmen turn Nasr City into Egypt’s Tiananmen Square, one cannot but wonder if an opportunity to engage in dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood has been irretrievably wasted?
After over 10 years of combating the Taliban’s and hundreds of thousands of lives wasted in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, there is now resort to dialogue – how many will be wasted before the resort to dialogue in this instance.
When the reprisals begin, would the redefining of what constitutes a coup, as is now taking place in Egypt, have been worth it?
So sad.
Picture: Violence in Egyptian streets as troops open fire on supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood
No comments:
Post a Comment