On the future of ECOWAS

 

 From my latest piece for RFI:

Ecowas' future in jeopardy after Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso leave group

The withdrawal of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso from the West African economic bloc triggered strong reactions among the group's members, with some promising to reverse the Sahel countries' decision before it is too late. But some are already questioning whether the organisation can survive the split.

If the three juntas do leave Ecowas, the economic group would lose important contributors, notably in cattle and food, as former Benin's prime minister Lionel Zinsou told RFI.

Economically, most Ecowas countries "are interdependent" according to experts. 

The trio had formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) in September to fight jihadist groups, which will now serve beyond a simple military framework.

Their goal seems to reinforce their Alliance, not only militarily, but also politically and economically. 

"The AES is based on a treaty for a collective security alliance, to support each other in case of aggression," international law researcher Julien Antouly told RFI. "We can imagine it evolving into an economic cooperation, a diplomatic alliance, to form a real bloc and act as a counterweight to the other Ecowas states."

Captain Ibrahim Traoré, the current leader of the junta in Burkina Faso, also told journalists the countries were thinking of leaving the common currency of West Africa, Franc CFA, considered by many as a negative and detrimental legacy of colonialism.

But according to the Timbuku Institute, it also "represents a clear regression in the security situation of the Ecowas region as a homogeneous area of collective security cooperation, where the risks and threats of inter-state conflict had been virtually eliminated.

Heads of states are currently discussing two options: an extraordinary summit in Abuja, Nigeria, maybe even this weekend, or a meeting of Ecowas heads of state at the next African Union summit in Addis Ababa mid-February. 

But for Babacar Ndiaye of the Timbuku Institute, "France and Ecowas were at the receiving end of AES diplomatic slaps in the face. So, the question is now 'who is next in the line'? Not if they can amend their relations with current West African regimes.

ECOWAS - Follow up

 

ECOWAS' key members to discuss with Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso despite withdrawal

The withdrawal of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso from the West African economic bloc triggered strong reactions among the group's members, with some promising to reverse the Sahel countries' decision before it's too late.

Mali and Burkina Faso sent their "formal notice" of their withdrawal from the West African bloc ECOWAS on Monday.

Niger followed on Tuesday. 

The notes came from the military regimes in all three countries, who had announced plans to withdraw from the bloc on Sunday, accusing it of posing a threat to their sovereignty.

The trio had formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) in September to fight jihadist groups, which will now serve beyond the simple military framework.

The main reason for the withdrawal seems to be the heavy sanctions imposed by regional group on the three countries following the military coups that overthrew elected civilian governments.

ECOWAS officially replied in a statement that it was awaiting "formal and direct notification" from the countries, while, under the bloc's statutes, withdrawal can't take effect for at least a year after official notification.

But most members are already trying to undo the withdrawal.    

Strong reactions

The news is leading to a seismic shift for the economies of West Africa.

Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger were founding members of ECOWAS back in 1975, among 15 countries including Togo, Benin, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Senegal, Sierra Leone, as well as Africa's giant Nigeria, the most populated nation on the continent, which hosts the bloc's headquarter and currently presides it.

Regional powerhouse Nigeria issued a statement late Monday expressing sadness over the three countries' departure from the bloc.

"Unelected leaders engage in a public posturing to deny their people the sovereign right to make fundamental choices over their freedom of movement, freedom to trade and freedom to choose their own leaders," a foreign ministry statement read.

The government in Abuja said it however remained "open for engagement" with Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger.

It also appealed to the international community to continue to extend its support for ECOWAS and its vision of closer regional partnership, cooperation and integration.

Mediation mission

Sierra Leone has also reacted strongly.

Timothy Kabba, its Foreign Affairs minister, is part of the ECOWAS mediation mission in Niger.

He told RFI that the withdrawal risks destabilising the whole region.

"These three countries had hinted last year that they were going to form the Alliance of Sahel States," he said. "But ECOWAS has to ensure that these important members of our community do not withdraw and leave the community.

He thinks this decision is a threat to the peace, security and stability of the entire community.

"These three countries are facing not only their political instability, but also terrorist groups like the al-Qaeda movement and Daesh," Kabba added, "therefore it is a bit worrying if these countries go it alone."

Togo sent as early as Monday its Territorial Administration minister Hodabalo Awaté to Niamey, to meet Niger's transitional authorities.

He hasn't communicated on the outcome yet.

Challenges for all sides

The three countries' withdrawal will not come without challenges.

It will affect the movement of goods and populations, citizens  risking to lose their right to travel freely without visas for 90 days within the rest of the bloc, and to trade without adding taxes.

The three nations also lack access to the sea, and without cooperation from neighbouring Togo and Benin could lose their connection to any port, even though Morocco has offered to help on that matter.

Some experts have described the withdrawal as evidence of the three juntas' fragility.

But according to the Timbuku Institute, it also "represents a clear regression in the security situation of the ECOWAS region as a homogeneous area of collective security cooperation, where the risks and threats of inter-state conflict had been virtually eliminated.

The experts think that withdrawal and constitution of the Alliance of Sahel States risk undermining even the legitimacy and credibility of the whole African Union (AU).

New post on my Substack newsletter: On our 'Entangled Pasts' - and how to move forward

 

On our 'Entangled Pasts' - and how to move forward

An 'Art, Colonialism and Change' exhibition will open at the Royal Academy in London, as new crimes make our present as bleak as the times in focus.

MELISSA CHEMAM

29 JAN 2024

-

Dear readers,

Since 2006, I have been working as a journalist and researcher on international relations between Europe, the Americans, the Caribbean, South West Asia and Africa, and how these relations are indeed marred with heavy past entanglements.

I focused on politics, but also history and the arts, going from Paris to London; Miami to Port-au-Prince, Haiti; New York to Tunis; Nairobi to Dakar; Mogadishu to Bangui; Algiers to Erbil; Niamey to Kampala; Istanbul to Bristol…

All places haunted by the consequences of colonialism and how to recover from the damages done.

So, when the opportunity to work with the Royal Academy again (my first event there was a discussion with the brilliant Guyanese British artist Hew Locke, in July 2023), I was both inspired and honoured.

Here are a few details about it:

Talk at The Royal Academy, London, Feb. 2024

Art and revolution 

As part of the 'Entangled Pasts, 1768–now - Art, Colonialism and Change' exhibition - 3 February - 28 April 2024:

Week 1: Art and revolution with Melissa Chemam

An introduction to the history of the long relationship between art and conflict, from revolutions such as the French Revolution and the Haitian Revolution, to the present day.

Melissa Chemam is a journalist, broadcaster and writer on art, music, social change, multiculturalism, African affairs, North/South relations, and activism. She is the author of the book Massive Attack - Out of the Comfort Zone (2019), and has been published by BBC Culture, Al Jazeera, RFI English, Art UK, CIRCA Art Magazine, the Public Art Review, the New Arab, The Independent, Reader’s Digest, UP Mag and Skin Deep. She also worked as a journalism lecturer and as the writer in residence at the Arnolfini art centre, in Bristol, from 2019 to 2022.

-

Read the whole post here:

On our 'Entangled Pasts' - and how to move forward

Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso quit ECOWAS regional block

 

Three West African junta-led states Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso said on Sunday they are leaving the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) immediately, according to a joint statement read out on Niger national television.

RFI English - 28/01/2024 - 15:51

The military regimes in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger shared a joined announcement on Sunday afternoon, regarding their immediate withdrawal from the West African bloc ECOWAS. 

The leaders of the three Sahel nations issued a statement saying it was a "sovereign decision" to leave the Economic Community of West African States "without delay".

"After 49 years, the valiant peoples of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger regretfully and with great disappointment observe that the (ECOWAS) organisation has drifted from the ideals of its founding fathers and the spirit of Pan-Africanism," Colonel Amadou Abdramane, Niger junta spokesman, said in the statement.

"The organisation notably failed to assist these states in their existential fight against terrorism and insecurity," Abdramane added.

Struggling with jihadist violence and poverty, the regimes have had tense ties with ECOWAS since coups took place in Niger last July, Burkina Faso in 2022 and Mali in 2020.

All three were suspended from ECOWAS with Niger and Mali facing heavy sanctions.

They have since hardened their positions in recent months and joined forces in an "Alliance of Sahel States".

A French military withdrawal from the Sahel -- the region along the Sahara desert across Africa -- has heightened concerns over the conflicts spreading southward to Gulf of Guinea states Ghana, Togo, Benin and Ivory Coast.

• Diplomatic dip for France as African nations seek out stronger partners

The prime minister appointed by Niger's military regime on Thursday blasted ECOWAS for "bad faith" after the bloc largely shunned a planned meeting in Niamey.

Niger had hoped for an opportunity to talk through differences with fellow states of ECOWAS which has has cold-shouldered Niamey, imposing heavy economic and financial sanctions following the military coup that overthrew elected president Mohamed Bazoum.

 (with newswires)

Nations Pausing UN Gaza Funding Could Be Violating Genocide Convention

 

A UN expert warned Sunday that countries defunding the UN agency for Palestinian refugees were breaching a court order to provide effective aid in Gaza and could be violating the international genocide convention.

By AFP - Agence France Presse

January 28, 2024

A number of donor countries -- including Australia, Britain, Finland, Germany and Italy -- on Saturday followed the lead of the United States in suspending additional funding to UNRWA.

That came after Israel alleged that several of the UN agency's staff members were involved in Hamas's October 7 attack.

Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, warned that the decision to pause funding to UNRWA "overtly defies" the order by the International Court of Justice to allow effective humanitarian assistance" to reach Gazans.

"This will entail legal responsibilities - or the demise of the (international) legal system," she wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

UNRWA reacted to the allegations by firing several staff and promising a thorough investigation into the unspecified claims, but Israel has nonetheless vowed to stop the agency's work in Gaza after the war.

The row between Israel and UNRWA follows the UN's International Court of Justice ruling on Friday that Israel must prevent possible acts of genocide in the conflict and allow more aid into Gaza.

Albanese, who is an independent expert appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, but who does not speak on behalf of the United Nations, highlighted the timing of the defunding decisions.

"The day after ICJ concluded that Israel is plausibly committing genocide in Gaza, some states decided to defund UNRWA," she said in a separate post on X.

By doing so, she said, countries are "collectively punishing millions of Palestinians at the most critical time, and most likely violating their obligations under the Genocide Convention".

On UNRWA

 

UN chief calls on countries to resume funding Gaza aid agency after allegations of militant ties

UN chief Antonio Guterres pleaded for donor states to "guarantee the continuity" of the body's Palestinian refugee agency after several halted funding over accusations of staff involvement in Hamas' 7 October attack on Israel.

 - Melissa Chemam for RFI

United Nations Secretary-General Guterres on Sunday pleaded for donor states to "guarantee the continuity" of the body's Palestinian refugee agency, known as UNRWA, after many suspended their aid.

"While I understand their concerns -- I was myself horrified by these accusations -- I strongly appeal to the governments that have suspended their contributions to, at least, guarantee the continuity of UNRWA's operations," Guterres said in a statement.

Guterres warned that the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees, would be forced to scale back aid to more than 2 million Palestinians as soon as February.

The coastal enclave is in the grip of a severe humanitarian crisis, with a quarter of the population facing starvation.

“The abhorrent alleged acts of these staff members must have consequences,” Guterres said in a statement.

“But the tens of thousands of men and women who work for UNRWA, many in some of the most dangerous situations for humanitarian workers, should not be penalised. The dire needs of the desperate populations they serve must be met,” he added.

Allegations

The United States, which is the largest donor to the agency, immediately suspended funding over the weekend, following accusations by Israel that a dozen of its employees were involved in Hamas' 7 October attack. 

The US were followed by several other countries, including Australia, Britain, Germany and Italy.

Guterres vowed on Sunday to hold to account "any U.N. employee involved in acts of terror" after allegations that some refugee agency staffers were involved in the 7 October Hamas attacks on Israel.

"Any U.N. employee involved in acts of terror will be held accountable, including through criminal prosecution," the UN chief said in a statement.

"The Secretariat is ready to cooperate with a competent authority able to prosecute the individuals in line with the Secretariat’s normal procedures for such cooperation."

The UN chief gave details about the UNRWA staffers implicated in the "abhorrent alleged acts".

Of the 12 implicated, he said, nine had been terminated, one was confirmed dead and the identities of the other two were being clarified.

The UNRWA said on Friday that it had fired the employees in question.

The dispute over UNRWA came as the International Court of Justice ruled Friday that Israel must do its utmost to limit death and destruction in its Gaza offensive.

• ICJ orders Israel to take measures to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza
• South African president hails ruling against Israel as step toward justice

Matter of 'survival'

More than 2 million of the territory’s 2.3 million people depend on it for “sheer survival,” including food and shelter, UNRWA director Philippe Lazzarini said, warning this lifeline can “collapse any time now.”

UNRWA has 13,000 staffers in Gaza, nearly all of them Palestinians.

It provides basic services, from medical care to education, for Palestinians families who fled or were driven out of what is now Israel during the 1948 war surrounding its creation — a majority of Gaza's population.

It has expanded operations during the war, running shelters housing hundreds of thousands of newly displaced people.

The health ministry in Gaza says at least 26,422 people have been killed, mostly women and children, and 65,087 have been injured in Israeli strikes on the enclave since 7 October 2023.

Israeli officials say about 1,140 people were killed in the Hamas-led October 7 attacks in southern Israel. 

Militant fighters took some 250 hostages during the attack, 132 being still in Gaza, according to Israeli figures. 

 (with newswires)

Gaza: The violence continues, despite the ICJ ruling

 

US: Demand Gaza Ceasefire, Impose Israel Arms Embargo to  Comply with International Court of Justice Provisional Orders in Genocide Case

Israel Kills 174 in Gaza Since ICJ Order to Stop Killing and Injuring Palestinians (Washington D.C., January 27, 2024) – The Biden Administration should immediately demand a ceasefire in Gaza and suspend all U.S. military assistance to Israel to comply with the January 26 ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) said today.  The Court’s provisional orders, based on a finding of plausible evidence that Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza, included demanding that Israel take all measures to prevent genocidal acts, specifically noting that this includes a prohibition on killing or injuring Palestinians, preventing and punishing the direct and public incitement to genocide; and taking immediate and effective steps to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza, citing the insufficiency of Israeli efforts to date. "Complying with the Court’s order that Israel stop the killing of Palestinians can only be read to require the U.S. to end its military support for Israel, which has played a critical role in aiding and abetting Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, DAWN’s executive director. “The U.S. has been complicit in every genocidal action that Israel has taken in Gaza, continuing to provide it with military equipment and political protection even after months of horrific evidence of its crimes in Gaza. Suspending military aid may at least protect the U.S. from itself being found liable for complicity in Israel’s genocide.” The ICJ's order of provisional measures in the case of South Africa v. Israel was based on its determination that South Africa had presented plausible evidence to support a finding that Israel was committing genocide against Palestinians. It specifically found that the acts that South Africa has accused Israel of could constitute genocide; that it is plausible that Israel is violating Palestinians’ right to be protected from genocide; and that there is a “real and imminent risk” that such violations could plausibly occur as the case continues to be adjudicated.  Paragraph 54 of the Court's ruling details the plausible scenario that Israel is engaged in actions that could be considered genocide against Palestinians. This includes killing and harming them with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the group as such. Article 41 of the ICJ Statute authorizes the court to order provisional measures if it finds there is an urgent situation where irreparable prejudice or consequences will result to the at-risk group, in this case, the Palestinians, while the case is pending. The court noted the extremely vulnerable situation of the Palestinian population in Gaza, where Israeli bombardment and embargo on fuel, water, and medicine has caused over 26,000 deaths; 66,000 injuries; the displacement of 85% of the population of Gaza; acute hunger for 93% of the population; and the vast demolition of homes making large parts of Gaza uninhabitable.   Accordingly, the Court, in Paragraph 78, ordered Israel to ensure its military refrains from acts that could lead to genocide. This includes prohibitions against killing, causing serious harm, deliberately inflicting on Palestinians conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction in whole or in part, and imposing measures to prevent births within the Palestinian group.  The Court also ordered Israel to take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in Gaza. Additionally, it mandated effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts of genocide. It also reminded all parties of their obligations under international humanitarian law and called for the release of hostages..  The Court has mandated that Israel must submit a report within 30 days detailing the measures it has taken to comply with its orders. The ICJ's review of Israel's compliance will be a significant factor in the ongoing litigation and could influence the Court's final judgment on whether Israel is committing genocide. Despite the court order, the IDF reportedly killed 174 Palestinians in Gaza on January 26 and intensified its military operations in the territory. The international community, particularly the United Nations Security Council, is expected to play a pivotal role in ensuring the implementation of these orders. If Israel fails to abide by the court’s orders, it will likely harm its defense in the ongoing litigation to confirm that Israel is committing genocide. Because the ICJ has no enforcement powers, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) will need to issue a resolution ordering its implementation. The UNSC should now have stronger backing to push for a new ceasefire resolution, so long as the U.S. does not use its veto power to block it. In addition, because the ICJ only reviews the legal responsibility of states, any determination of the responsibility of individuals responsible for genocide would fall to the International Criminal Court, which is currently investigating allegations of international crimes committed by both Israel and Hamas.  “The Court's order for Israel to cease actions that constitute genocide, specifically the killing and harming of Palestinians, effectively functions as a call for a ceasefire, but with the killing of another 174 Palestinians yesterday, Israel is clearly ignoring the court’s order,” said Raed Jarrar, DAWN’s advocacy director. “By mandating a halt to the killing and injuring Palestinians, the order aligns with the fundamental aspects of a ceasefire – the cessation of hostilities and the protection of civilian lives.” DAWN has called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza since October 9, 2023, and urged the Biden Administration to call for a ceasefire on November 21, 2023. Other human rights groups, including Palestinian groups such as Al-Haq, Al-Mizan, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, have also concluded that ICJ's ruling effectively acts as a de facto order for the cessation of hostilities and a practical equivalent to a ceasefire.  Article III of the Genocide Convention, which includes "complicity in genocide" among punishable acts, implicitly mandates state parties, such as the United States, to refrain from actions that might constitute aiding and abetting genocide. Practically, this encompasses the cessation of arms supplies to Israel because these arms could be used in actions amounting to genocide. Paragraph 41 of the ICJ ruling in this case also recalls that under Article I of the Genocide Convention, all state parties have committed “to prevent and to punish” the crime of genocide. This underscores a binding legal obligation for the U.S. to take affirmative measures against potential genocidal actions.  “Given the ICJ's ruling, the US faces a significant challenge to its blank check policy, especially its military support, for Israel,” said Adam Shapiro, DAWN’s advocacy director for Israel and Palestine. “Continued military aid to Israel in light of these findings will be viewed as contradictory to the U.S.'s commitment to prevent genocide and uphold the rule of law.”  U.S. policies also require the Biden Administration to reevaluate arms transfers to Israel in light of the ICJ’s finding that there is a plausible case for genocide by Israel. President Biden's Conventional Arms Transfer Policy restricts arms transfers “likely to exacerbate risks of genocide.” This policy emphasizes the importance of responsible arms transfer and is designed to prevent arms transfers that risk contributing to violations of human rights or international humanitarian law. The ICJ’s ruling finding the claims of potential genocide by Israel as plausible directly implicates the policy mandate to avoid exacerbating the risks of genocide. According to the policy, the administration will not authorize any arms transfer if it is "more likely than not" that the arms will be used to commit, facilitate, or aggravate risks such as genocide, crimes against humanity, or grave breaches of international humanitarian law. “Today’s ICJ ruling makes clear that there is a clear and plausible genocide in Gaza right now, which should trigger application of Biden’s own arms transfer policy to bar further weapons to Israel,” said Jarrar. “American taxpayers should not bear the burden of being further implicated in Israel’s genocidal conduct.” The United States has long championed enforcement of other findings of plausible genocide and provisional order by the ICJ, most recently concerning Myanmar and Russia. In the case of The Gambia v. Myanmar, which centers on allegations of genocide against the Rohingya population, the United States formally recognized that the Myanmar military committed genocide against the Rohingya, provided funding for the UN’s Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar with almost $1 million, and sanctioned Burmese officials for their role in the atrocities. In the case of Ukraine v. Russia, the United States intervened to argue for a broad interpretation of jurisdiction under the Genocide Convention, highlighting the global responsibility to ensure its correct application. The U.S. submission emphasized that the Genocide Convention does not permit a member state to commit aggression under the pretext of preventing or punishing genocide. “The U.S. should signal its support for the enforcement of the ICJ’s provisional orders with the same robust and committed policies and actions that it has shown in the cases against Russia and Myanmar,” said Whitson. “The whole world is watching how the U.S. responds to this historic court decision.” DAWN urges the U.S. government to demonstrate a consistent and principled commitment to the international rules-based order by abiding by and supporting the enforcement of the ICJ’s orders in the genocide case in Israel and to reconsider its continued military and political support for Israel. Failure to act will have far-reaching consequences for global perceptions about the U.S.’s commitment to justice and the rule of law. The United States should also support the ICC’s ongoing investigation into crimes in Palestine and its efforts to hold individual perpetrators accountable.