Britain says it will support military intervention in Ivory Coast

[George Wallace]

This from the Christian Science Monitor



Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Terrorism & Security

Britain says it will support military intervention in Ivory Coast

By Tom A. Peter, Correspondent / December 31, 2010


Article Link


British Foreign Secretary William Hague said that his country will support UN-sanctioned military intervention as fears of the tension devolving into genocide and civil war grow.


With Ivory Coast's defeated incumbent president still refusing to step down, British officials have said their country would support the use of United Nations-sanctioned military force to resolve the situation.

While William Hague, the United Kingdom’s foreign secretary has said the UK is not about to deploy British troops to the African nation, they are taking a number of other diplomatic measures to bring an end to the political stand-off, reports Britain’s Press Association.

The race between President-elect Alassane Ouattara and incumbent President Laurent Gbagbo was tight, and President Gbagbo refuses to leave office, even though Ouattara is recognized as the victor by the international community. Gbagbo still maintains control of the nation’s armed forces and Mr. Ouattara and his supporters are currently trapped in a hotel.

The UK is already taking a number of measures to ensure that Gbagbo hands over power to Ouattara. Britain has given “very strong support” to the Ivory Coast neighbors who recognize Ouattara as the rightful president, supported the UN Security Council’s efforts to renew the mandate to keep UN forces there, worked with the European Union to take restrictive measures against Gbagbo, and British diplomats are keeping close ties with Ouattara and his inner circle, reports BBC.

“It is time for him to recognize that he must go,” said William Hague, the UK’s foreign secretary in an interview with BBC radio. “He should not underestimate the determination of the international community that the will of that people of that country should be recognized and a democratic transfer of power take place.”

Despite the international pressure, the situation in the Ivory Coast remains fragile. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon warned that the West African nation could be on the verge of civil war. Gbagbo’s “Street General,” Minister for Youth Charles Ble Goude called on Ivorians to storm Ouattara’s hotel on New Year's Day, which is currently being protected by the UN, reports Agence France-Presse.

Youssofou Bamba, the Ivory Coast’s new UN ambassador warned that his nation may even be on “the brink of genocide,” reports The Christian Science Monitor.

There are concerns that Gbagbo’s security forces could be hiding mass graves, reports Euronews. UN officials say they are concerned that a building in Abidjan, the largest city in the Ivory Coast, could have as many as 80 bodies. Human rights groups have accused Gbagbo loyalists of abducting and torturing Ouattara supporters. Gbagbo’s forces have refused to allow the UN access to the building.

The United States has also been closely monitoring the situation. On Tuesday, Obama administration officials dispatched a Pentagon team to Abidjan to look into evacuating US diplomats and citizens, reports The Washington Post. The US and France also said they are “exploring the prospect of reinforcing the UN peacekeeping mission in Ivory Coast.” According to UN officials there are no plans to add to its 9,000 troops currently stationed there.

Throughout Abidjan there are appear to be mixed reactions to the UN peacekeeping forces, with some people showing support and others openly hostile. In the last two days, two UN patrols were attacked reports Reuters.

More on Link

 

[FutureQYR]

I think having neighboring countries more or less influence him to 'retire' is the best option at this point, besides protecting Quattara UN intervention to protect Quattara supporters should be dealt with carefully and not be implemented prematurely otherwise it may cause what it seeks to defend against, afteralll Gbagbo has already stated his want for the UN to leave. which I suppose could be his way of gaining time to eradicate his opposition...my head hurts.

Opinions?

 

[George Wallace]

Why does your head hurt?

Surrounding nations are not in any position to oust Gbagbo.  Their militaries are weak, and their governments are just as corrupt. 

 

[FutureQYR]

I just feel like its kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Obviously Gbagbo isn't going to step down, so something needs to happen otherwise. atleast according to the opinions of many, Civil war will occur.
Sending more UN troops would probably cause Gbagbo and those that support Gbagbo to retaliate on Quattara, don't you think? Again possibly causing civil war.
On the other hand you can't really take all UN out and hope the situation resolves itself quietly.

I just don't see a better option.

 

[George Wallace]

Sure there is a better option.

Why be high and mighty in Africa?  We have already seen that it doesn't work.  What we saw in Rwanda, we saw forty years earlier when it was the Belgian Congo.  Now it is the Congo again, and things have not changed.  We have tried unsuccessfully to bring peace to Somalia and that was a complete failure.  The Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Zimbabwe and so many other African nations are corrupt and religiously unstable.  Why don't we just let them do their own thing; cut down on their populations and then when the dust settles, perhaps the "winners" will be more amiable.

 

[FutureQYR]

While I respect your opinion, and understand your points, I just feel like one could say that about any conflict, anywhere in the world. Is it really right to give up on finding a favourable resolution to a problem like the one occuring in the Ivory Coast, just becuase "we've" been through it in Africa in the past? What ever happened to humanity?

 

[George Wallace]

Humanity?

Has there been any signs of that in this area of the world?  We can't force 'humanity' on these people.  Without them having some sort of 'humanity' any efforts to bring peace or stability to the region is all for naught.

 

[aesop081]

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said that his country will support.......

This from a country that recently all but eviscerated its ability to intervene just about anywhere......

 

[FutureQYR]

Not particularly. It doesn't change my opinion though. It may sound stubborn, but if the UN were to refuse to continue operating in Africa because it been unsuccesful there in the past makes me want to say it should stop peacekeeping everywhere. Why should they bother operating in safer areas, that require simpler solutions to reach resolutions when common sense would dictate those are the problems that could more readily be solved by the country of that conflicts origin.
Africa on the otherhand is ripe with poverty, corruption, and disease. If theres anyone that needs assistance ad intervention, I feel its them.

Not to derail the thread...

 

[Old Sweat]

Something is afoot. The Brits are not prone to making unilateral statements of this nature. While they are in the process of eviscerating their power to intervene in small, nasty countires, they are not completely toothless, yet.

To me, a key part of the statement is "UN sanctioned." Which one of the permanent five is apt to use its veto here and why? Methinks the midnight oil is burning in various capitals.

And last, to be a contrarian, who has rapidly deployable forces these days? Not very many countries, and which one would scrape the bottom of the barrel to sort out the Ivory Coast?

 

[George Wallace]

UN "Peacekeeping" is only done when the nation in question has reached a level of stability and asks for outside help. 

Côte d'Ivoire has stated it wants UN Peacekeepers OUT.

 

[FutureQYR]

While im not questioning whether or not such is true, how is it they (the UN) managaed to get in there in the first place then?

 

[quadrapiper]

Africa on the otherhand is ripe with poverty, corruption, and disease. If theres anyone that needs assistance ad intervention, I feel its them.

Not entirely sure that any of the nations you'd a) want to intervene, and b) generally on for that sort of thing, have the resources or will at the moment.  India might be an exception to the former, but has other problems. China certainly has the resources, but I don't think they're interested, and can't say that an expansionist and wealthy Communist power is something the world wants to see again.

To clean up Africa would, in many ways, require an effort in excess of what's currently going on in Afghanistan and Iraq: neither had, pre-invasion, the perfect storm of problems affecting most of Africa. Guessing, at many removes, but it would seem even the Taliban weren't as incompetent or malignant at governing (or their actions were ameliorated by traditional power structures, village-by-village clannishness, and terrain) as the thieves' guilds, crackpot ideologues, and Cold Wars/post-colonial detritus running most of Africa between South Africa and Morocco, Algeria, Libya, and Egypt.

Any intervention able to cause results that'd last after pull-out would likely be too large to garner public support, and would be shouted down as a colonialist adventure.