|
DIPLOMACY VS TERRORISM Proceedings of the EIIPD Conference on the Challenges of African Diplomacy in the 21st Century- Part I FOREWORD On 4 November 2004, the Ethiopian International Institute for Peace and Development (EIIPD) conducted a Seminar on “The Challenges of African Diplomacy In the 21st Century”. Guest speakers who presented papers included three ambassadors accredited to Ethiopia, senior officers from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and two Ethiopian specialists in Information Technology and its impact on diplomacy. The presentations could be grouped under three themes (1) The challenges of African diplomacy in forging international cooperation to address the root causes of international terrorism and contain its threat; (2) the relationship of 21st century African diplomacy and development needs; and (3) how an African diplomat should cope with the realities of information technology revolution. The seminar was opened by Professor Kinfe Abraham, President of the EIIPD, with a keynote address which traced the evolution of diplomacy and the emerging African diplomacy by way of setting the tone for the seminar discussions and indicating the objective of organizing the forum. Featured in this issue are the papers which may be termed as representing African and Middle Eastern perspectives on the challenges of international terrorism. Thus, the combined title: Diplomacy Vs Terrorism. The Evolution and Challenges of African Diplomacy in the 21st Century Keynote Address by Prof. Kinfe Abraham, President of EIIPD
The first civilization to develop an orderly system of diplomacy was that of ancient Greece. Ambassadors and special missions were sent from city to city to deliver messages and warnings, to transfer gifts, and to plead the cases of their own people before the rulers of other city-states. Nevertheless, these diplomatic missions were occasional and periodic. With the decline of Greece and the rise of the Roman Empire, the Greek system of diplomacy disappeared. As Rome expanded, its diplomacy served the purposes of conquest and annexation. The Romans were said not to have a positive propensity for coexisting with other states on the basis of mutual interest. Rome issued commands; it did not negotiate. For almost a thousand years after the fall of Rome, Europeans thought of themselves not as members of separate nations but rather as members of smaller groups vaguely bound to some feudal overlords. Although localities had relations from time to time, no record exists of any formal diplomatic practices during the Middle Ages. 2. Roots of African Diplomacy Africa was decolonized four decades ago but still remains underdeveloped. It has diverse natural resources which are not yet tapped. But, its people remain poor and poverty has continued to intensify. During the colonial period, Africa was viewed as a tabula rasa devoid of culture and history. Nevertheless, this now belongs to the dust-bin of history. At present, it is compelled to join the community of nation and international fora where major events that affect it take place. This is important in order for the continent to be able to address its residual challenges. Contemporary African diplomacy has its roots in the decolonization process. During this period, African nationalism came in two divergent moods, with variations in between. There was what one might call the enthusiastic and passionate school of African nationalism. The other school of African nationalism was characterized by a markedly subdued and cautious mood. It had a dominant presence in French-speaking colonial Africa, but was by no means confined to only that part of the continent. These represented the two main strands of African nationalism which began to influence the course of the continent’s diplomacy soon after independence. Yet for all the differences in temperament and methods, the anti-colonial struggle was built on one foundation. It had many fronts, but it remained a unified struggle. Integral to the project of African independence was also the establishment of African unity. There was never at any point a canonical definition of what African unity and diplomacy were and there still is none. It meant many things to many people. Some read into the diplomacy of African unity as the establishment of a continental government which would mobilize the enormous resources of the region, human and material, for the continent’s purposeful development. Others saw it as providing a framework for periodic political consultations and functional co-operation, with variations in between. But, whatever those variations and inflexions, the idea of African unity derived from the same historical source. The yearning for unity went back a long way. From the first stirrings of the African awakening, African intellectuals, both at home and in the Diaspora, had drawn one firm conclusion from their experience. This was so because Africans had gone through the horror of slavery and colonial subjugation not as Ashantis, lgbos or Zulus but as Africans. Unfortunately, both slavery and colonial rule were also greatly facilitated by African disunity and weakness. It followed from this reasoning that if Africa was not to lose its independence again and suffer another period of humiliation, it had to defend its newly won freedom within some framework of unity which required diplomacy. Hence, the fathers of African nationalism were not unaware of the practical problems which faced African Unity. But, the imperatives for some form of unity were greater than the difficulties dividing the African leaders. Hence, no sooner had the first independent states emerged than the attempts at unity began. 3. Africa and the Global Diplomatic Arena Today, we are in an age of interdependence which requires diplomacy. This is so because of the speedy pace of modernization and technological development. To this may be added the emergence of the phenomenon of globalization which has brought the world closer because of trade and international economic relations. The post colonial African states, many of which had strong bonds with the ex-colonial powers, soon embarked on new diplomatic ties with other states in order to get their independence affirmed. This was also necessary to establish mutually beneficial bilateral links and to solicit funds for their developmental efforts. Nevertheless, much of their diplomacy was based on the traditional cocktail approach which did not explore the modern tools. Much, however, has changed since then because of the rapid explosion of information technology which was expedited by the phenomenon of globalization which has opened up new challenges and opportunities making territorial boundaries almost irrelevant. At present, African states are forced to explore the new frontiers of diplomacy presented by the electronic high way of email and allied instruments. This has become necessary to maintain swift diplomatic and commercial links that enhance political and economic ties. It’s also important for marketing their products and services. African diplomacy is as effective as the governments behind it. It cannot be effective if the governments behind it are unstable, lack legitimacy or are infirm in purpose as it is the case with most African states. Hence, it’s only the responsible and democratic states with freely elected governments that would enable Africa to pursue good diplomacy in the international fora. To have a well-defined diplomacy one needs a mechanism of achieving it. This, in turn, can be achieved under conditions of democracy and good governance in which human rights and transparency are assured. It also requires international cooperation since we currently live in an interdependent and globalized world. 4. The Current Challenges of African Diplomacy At present, the key challenges to African diplomacy are building peace and security, reducing poverty, establishing good governance and strengthening regional cooperation via organizations like COMESA, ECOWAS, IGAD, SADC, etc. Further, the continent faces other challenges like terrorism, brain drain, arms proliferation, child trafficking, diseases like HIV/AIDS, and problems related to globalization. Given the above, African diplomacy should be geared towards addressing the continent’s challenges by:
It’s only through effective collaboration that African states would be able to develop themselves. If Africa fails to meet these challenges urgently, it would be difficult to anticipate how it can extricate itself from the pincer-grip of poverty and underdevelopment. This seminar entitled the Challenges of African Diplomacy in the 21st Century is, therefore, aimed to asses the current status of Africa diplomacy including the challenges and opportunities which it faces. The ultimate aim of the seminar is also to come up with constructive and practical ideas on how the continent’s economic diplomacy including the mobilization of domestic and external resources can be enhanced via the use of the modern tools of cyber technology and print and electronic media. éUP THE CHALLENGES OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM TO AFRICAN DIPLOMACY IN THE 21ST CENTURY by Ambassador Wasswa Biriggwa I want to thank the organizers for asking me to speak on International Terrorism and the challenges it poses to us. While we have not yet arrived at a world-wide acceptable definition of terrorism, we are all agreed on its devastating impact. Many of us have seen images of terrorist acts while some of us have experienced it in our own backyard. Terrorism continues to be one of the biggest challenges of the 21st Century to the extent that it is carried out sporadically following no particular pattern and it ignites varied responses throughout the world. While some regions of the world are more affected than others, no one can tell with certainty that a particular region or country will not be affected next. For purposes of this discussion we shall limit ourselves to the terrorist threat of Africa and the challenges it poses General Overview of the Terrorist Threat in Africa On August 7, 1998, two bombs exploded outside the US Embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi killing 224 people. Four years later terrorists killed 15 people in an Israeli-owned hotel near Mombassa and simultaneously fired at an Israeli passenger jet taking off from Mombassa airport. Responsibility for these attacks was traced to Al Qaeda. In the west and central Africa, criminal networks launder cash from illicit trade in diamonds, joining forces with corrupt local leaders to form lawless bazaars that could be used by terrorists to shelter their assets. This led the UN to ban trade in the so called “Conflict Diamonds”. There are other less visible terrorist attacks and areas of potential attacks. Many African countries continue to experience a potent mix of communal tensions and radical Islamism. These conditions breed dangerous militarism. Our contention is that terrorism must be fought in a more holistic manner as opposed to dealing with individual terrorist groups. Africa’s fundamental problems must be addressed. The lingering presence of terrorism in the continent attests to the deep-rooted nature of the continent’s problems. International terrorism presents a lot of challenges which we shall address under the three following broad headings; - Definition - Root causes - Combating Terrorism 1. Definition: As you are already aware terrorist acts have been defined by many international and national legal instruments. For instance OAU Convention on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism defines it as follows; “Terrorist Act” means: a) any act which is a violation of the criminal laws of a State Party and which may endanger the life, physical integrity or freedom of, or cause serious injury or death to, any person, any number or group of persons or causes or may cause damage to public or private property, natural resources, environmental or cultural heritage and is calculated or intended to:
b) any promotion, sponsoring, contribution to, command, aid, incitement, encouragement, attempt, threat, conspiracy, organizing, or procurement of any person, with the intent to commit any act referred to in paragraph (a) (i) to (iii). “ This definition, like many others is neither definitive nor conclusive. The variance in definition imparts the variance in the meaning of this concept of terrorism. The definitions are all inclusive but not conclusive. This means that we can expect other acts not necessarily amounting to terrorism today to amount to terrorism tomorrow. It also means that the methods and means open to terrorists to carry out their acts are not limited. The Uganda Anti Terrorist Act 2002, in its part III article 7 to 9 defines acts and activities that are construed as terrorism or terrorism related offences. In its part IV and the second schedule to the Act it provides what is construed as terrorist organizations. Suffice to note here that the definition there is also not conclusive but inclusive. Various organizations and countries have lists of terrorist groups which are also not uniform. For instance we have USA list, EU list and other states lists. The world is not yet in agreement on what international terrorism is or who the terrorist groups are. For instance, does every country in the world have a right to define and determine who its terrorists are or should there be a uniform system and criteria upon which terrorists can be identified? For as long as the above issue is not resolved, universal support in the fight against terrorism will remain divided and therefore less effective. The world therefore needs to agree on a standard definition of terrorism and terrorist groups. 2. Root causes of Terrorism: We are of the view that a lot of effort has been placed on the prevention of immediate terrorist attacks which has no doubt averted a lot of attacks. What remains an even bigger challenge and perhaps the greatest challenge is identifying and eradicating the root causes of terrorism. We maintain that terrorism cannot be justified under any circumstances and therefore the existence of its causes does not justify it. Below we list some of the issues that the world, particularly, Africa must address in order to eradicate terrorism. Inequalities among states: The world continues to experience increases both in the levels of prosperity and poverty. While the world’s poor get desperately poorer the rich get richer. Poverty is immoral and dangerous. People who have nothing to lose are willing to risk anything including life. Prosperous countries are stable because citizens have a lot at stock. This is a trend that the world and Africa must address through deliberate and concerted efforts such as fair trade, Foreign Direct Investment to the poorer regions, Debt Relief and Increased Aid Flows which must be decisively handled with unwavering commitment. Inequalities within states: There are lots of inequalities within states, in the access to basic needs of life such as food, natural resources, health care, education and the ability of citizens to influence their governments. This situation presents resentment among citizens and creates a breeding ground for acts of violence. There is need to build good governance within states to foster accountability, transparency, human rights and democracy. Proliferation of Conflicts: Peace is the first condition for development. Africa’s porous borders, interrelated conflicts and interconnected drug trafficking networks continue to fuel terrorism on the continent. As long as certain countries continue to be “hot spots” they also present good ground for the breeding of terrorism. Where there is conflict there is bound to be irresponsible use of weapons of war. The world needs to develop policies that give political support for ending conflicts and practical support to consolidate peace. Proliferation of small arms and light weapons: The trafficking of small arms and light weapons is still rampant in Africa. Proliferation of small arms is a major obstacle in the fight against terrorism. Nations must also adopt responsible arms export policies. Post Conflict Reconstruction: In addition to the physical damage that is inflicted on any country during conflict there is also the social damage that is inflicted on the society. Conflict leaves behind the culture of violence and an urge to revenge. These social effects of war have not been adequately addressed together with the other issues in post conflict reconstruction. Societies that are emotionally scarred by war are ripe ground for terrorism. Africa needs to adequately attend to these issues to prevent the recruitment of victims of conflict into terrorist organizations. 3. Fight against Terrorism: We recognize the International, Regional and sub-regional efforts being made to combat terrorism. Significant achievements have been realized under initiatives like the IGAD Plan of Action for preventing and combating terrorism, the AU Plan of Action for preventing and combating Terrorism, etc. The fight against terrorism must take on a holistic approach. The emphasis today seems to be on the shutting down of existing Al Qaeda cells. This is good and has in fact averted many attacks but the economic distress, ethnic and religious fissures, fragile governance, weak democracies and rampant abuse of human rights that afflict many African countries must be addressed as a matter of urgency. There is an undeniable link between the lingering presence of terrorism in the Horn of Africa and the region’s problems of internal conflicts, weak and failing states, pervasive corruption and extreme poverty. The approach that is adopted needs to take into account all the above problems. Funding cannot be allocated to the fight against terrorism as an isolated issue but rather emphasis should be put on rooting out all the social ills that breed it. Unilateralism in the fight against terrorism; In 2002, in an effort to combat terrorism in the Horn of Africa, the United States created the Combined, Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa involving 1,800 US soldiers backed by US Central Command. Its mission was to deter, preempt, and disable terrorists emanating from Somalia, Kenya and Yemen. In June 2003, President Bush announced a $100 million package for counter terrorism measures in the fight against terrorism. This indicates the commitment of the US to the fight against terrorism but it also shows that it is so far the only “power” willing to pioneer this fight. After the September 11th attacks on the US, the US declared the war on terrorism. The battle fields of this war extend to wherever terrorists hide, run or plan. The world has since witnessed, supported and or participated in the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq led by the United States. The fact that with terrorism an individual’s actions are clandestine and their relation to each specific act of violence is difficult to ascertain makes the situation even more complex. Many questions have been raised regarding the conduct of this war on terror such as the following; - Does the magnitude and severity of the terrorist attacks on their own justify the proclamation of war or should these attacks be treated as serious crimes warranting prosecution? - Are the terrorist groups organized criminal operations in which case rules of war would not apply to them or are they in fact rebellions in which case rules of war would be applicable? - Does terrorism justify the use of rules of war when in fact criminal law provisions are adequate to deal with a given situation? It is apparent that there is not yet a uniform answer to these questions. If the fight against terrorism is going to remain legitimate, it must be carried out within a clear and acceptable framework which is not yet in place today. There is need for a harmonized counter terrorism legislation for all African Union Member States to ease mutual legal assistance and extradition of terrorist suspects. Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing; there is difficulty in combating money laundering and fraud. African Governments are still finding a problem in combating money laundering due to the sophisticated nature of money transfers employed by terrorists where at times you find transfers which are not registered through any known money transfer systems. This is popularly known as the “Hawala” system. Like in many other fields, Africa continues to get minimal attention in the fight against terrorism. Conflicts in Africa continue to be defined in narrow humanitarian terms and the danger they pose as breeding ground for terrorism is ignored. Africa must therefore fight to focus international attention and action on the terrorist threat facing Africa Fighting terrorism in a democratic society has always been a challenge because some actions undertaken by governments in countering terrorism may be perceived by the general public to be an infringement on their rights; for example regulating and tightening security at border points. Lack of action by government may also be construed as not taking enough care to protect its citizens against terrorism. Africa must also deal with the inherent fear that dictatorial and despotic regimes that wish to perpetuate themselves in power may easily brand members of the opposition as terrorists. This gathering hardly needs to be reminded that the gallant sons and daughters of African Liberation Movements mounted sustained anti-colonialism, anti-racist and anti-apartheid struggles in the shadow of intense campaign (to brand them as) terrorism by Africa’s detractors. In the same vein in order to counter that diversionary pro-colonialism and pro-apartheid lobby, African diplomacy had to be organized under the umbrella of the UN, NAM (Non-Aligned Movement) and all other fora to win our independence and freedom. In conclusion I say that unfortunately the world remains deeply divided in the face of terrorism and what we need is a holistic approach to stamp out the root causes of terrorism. 4 November 2004 Addis Ababa |
