Mali: a pseudo-democracy with which Europeans were satisfied?
(BRUSSELS2) To listen to some, without the intervention in Libya, Mali would not have all its problems... I must say that I have more and more doubts. And all the opinions collected converge. Mali was no more than a facade of democracy and had been heading largely towards a failed state for some time now. The Libyan collapse was rather an aggravating or accelerating factor than a preliminary cause.
From PV to the chain
A witness speaks. " In Mali during the last elections, while the electoral observers were counting the ballots, in the next room, having all the stamps of all the prefectures, we were manufacturing false reports on the chain”. A phenomenon that seemed to have been known for years already. " When we saw ATT (Amadou Toumani Toure) to arrive in a country, with its retinue, and its behavior. We didn't really have any doubts about how the guy worked.
A satisfying pseudo-democracy
A pseudo-democracy therefore but which delighted Europeans in need of a model in the region. The former president was smart and shrewd enough to know what to please in order to get help. And the Europeans banked! At around 90 million euros per year on a budget not exceeding one billion euros, it was however possible to "weigh" on the course of a power.
The abandonment of the North already consumed
The division of the country was consummated in the facts. The North has been abandoned. " We had tried to support in northern Mali, a plan that the president had designed, the PSPSDN, which consisted in redeploying the State around military bases with social services around these bases” says Gilles de Kerchove, the EU's counter-terrorism coordinator. There had not been enough political consensus, not enough will and means or explanations to the population ».
A divided army
As for the Malian army, it was crossed by currents in different directions which perverted its effectiveness: appointments of senior officers who had value only their proximity to power.... So when did the conflict in Libya occur? , it was the icing on the cake. But just the cherry. Without being a fine strategist (:-), it was quite easy to see that, from the start of the NATO operation and the first looting of the barracks, closing the borders of this country as quickly as possible, monitoring them closely was as necessary as bombing mercenary pick-ups, if we wanted to avoid a scattering of weapons (read: Shouldn't Europe set up an EUMM / EUBAM Libya? - article published in April 2011!).
Why did you let
We can therefore ask ourselves a question today: why have we let it happen, in the capitals. Mali is a fairly open country. And many countries are there. If Paris had a traditional proximity and a good knowledge of Malian networks, France was not the only one there. Ottawa, Berlin, Washington were also quite present with committed military cooperation. Finally, Brussels (EU) had a strong and developed cooperation. So there were a number of eyes and clues on the spot to be able to sound the alarm and act.
No lessons for the future
I asked several people about this absence... No answer, no attempt at explanation. It's worrying. Because what happened in Mali could happen again in several surrounding countries. We think of Nigeria of course. But this already restless country might not be the first to fall. Cameroon, Senegal, Côte d'Ivoire are also sitting on volcanoes, and crossed by secessionist tendencies... Who knows... in 5 or 8 years, it will be Somalis or Malians who will form stabilization forces African!
(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)
Read also:
