By Lindsay Barrett
The outburst of military interventions in some former French colonies in West Africa, most noticeably in Mali and Burkina Faso, is undoubtedly the most devastating issue of concern to confront the regional organisation ECOWAS in recent times.
The breakdown of public confidence in the elected governments of both countries was manifested in public disenchantment provoked by the escalation of terrorist activity in them. As a consequence, the armies, which have been unable to craft a victory over a multitude of insurrections have been elevated to the role of national saviours in spite of the circumstance of incompetence and internal disenchantment that have been the main elements of their attempt to control the security situation in the two nations.
In confronting this dire circumstance created by dysfunctional governance, the reaction of the organisation has reflected an attitude of knee-jerk response rather than of serious and original forethought. In suspending both countries from participation in the deliberations of the body the ECOWAS authority might worsen rather than alleviate the problems that military intervention could generate in the region, while its major objective should be the restoration of regional stability.
For this reason, it will be necessary for the body to continue to engage meaningfully in dialogue and full conversation with the people and the ruling class in both nations as they seek to accommodate and install the formal processes of governance in their countries in future.
ECOWAS should have learnt impressive lessons from its experience in the earlier crises that it confronted in Liberia and Sierra Leone where its innovative military intervention eventually evolved into a syndrome of negotiated conflict resolution that returned both countries to representative governance. Although the circumstances are very different, the fact that the organisation remained steadfastly engaged with both countries throughout the most dysfunctional periods of their existence provided the people and those who administered the affairs of state in both countries with constant hope for the corrective resolution of their problems. This level of hope should always be provided by the regional organisation for all its members no matter how dysfunctional the political circumstance in the national space has become.
For ECOWAS to be relevant to the national aspirations of all its member states, it must be prepared to recognise the issues that give rise to change and could provoke conflict within the different national territories. All members must be prepared to accommodate each other’s national concerns. After all, it would be imprecise and erroneous for today’s ECOWAS members to forget that when the organisation was founded almost all the major advocates of its foundation were themselves, military leaders.
The purpose of regional organisations such as ECOWAS in Africa is to build new functional communities of independent nations out of former colonies. An important element of this purpose, which will definitely evolve as the process develops, is a change of perception in the relationship between the former colonies and their former colonial masters. As this occurs, those who drive the process will need the support and understanding of the impulses that give rise to their search for change and the revision of historical relationships. They will therefore need sympathy and support from regional allies. Already it has become clear especially after the utterances that have been crafted by the military men, who have taken power in Mali and Burkina Faso, that this is a major element of the contemporary coup makers’ motives.
It will certainly be more productive for the regional organisation to show sympathy for the attitude expressed by the military men and to help them to implement their wishes on behalf of the national populace rather than to ignore and neglect their stated objectives.
However, since it is well known that ECOWAS’ conduct is based on copying the presumptions of the United Nation’s convention it should surprise no one that it has taken the stand that it has. For the process of restoration of stability to be implemented through the ECOWAS authority, it must reconsider its stance and choose to strengthen its engagement with the two-member nations in spite of the new circumstance of governance that is extant in them.
In order to achieve this, the regional organisation must be prepared to be innovative in its policymaking and to deploy a high degree of originality borne out of the recognition that its objectives and its decision making processes must be tailored to serve the interests of the West African masses. The organisation will abort the true purpose of its existence if it is perceived to be reacting to disagreements among elitist leaders without seeking to find points of accommodation that will generate harmonious discussion among the various governments of the region regardless of their provenance.
The undertaking of discussions about the processes of governance must become a major component of the cycle of regional discourse among all those who are involved in governance in West Africa if the true relevance and value of ECOWAS is to be achieved. The organisation must be prepared to formulate methodologies for communication and discourse that will enable those countries that have fallen into crisis mode to continue to interact with neighbouring states without being excluded from the processes of negotiation and cooperation. Collaboration with, and advice from, their neighbours must continue in spite of the changes that they have undergone and ECOWAS must strive to make this possible and continuous.
Barrett sent this article from Abuja
