On the brink

I was flown in to London this week to participate in a conference about the pros and cons of scaling up aid: will a big influx of cash finally solve poverty in Africa? My session was about conflict and development, and one of the presentations was a bitter indictment of the ‘post-conflict reconstruction cycle’: conflict – heavy-handed international pressure – tenuous peace accord – big UN peacekeeping mission – early elections – rushed DDR – half-cooked security sector reform – quick withdrawal of UN troops – continued poverty – and more often than not, a return to conflict. The solution: focus on human security rather than poverty, a new campaign to “Make War History”, Millennium Security Goals, and at country level, more economics, less politics. In particular, elections before jobs are a recipe for disaster. Hmmmm… As usual, the case for why things don’t work is made compellingly, the one for what should be done about it rather less convincing.

Now it’s my turn to talk, and I’m supposed to be saying something about the lessons from DRC. So, does it work? The world’s largest peace-keeping mission, 17,500 troops, an annual tab of some US$1,2 billion, $500 million spent on the elections alone, development money pouring in from all sides, the embodiment of the current favoured paradigm among proponents of intervention… Well, what say thee – is it peace for our time, or the onset of yet another round of fighting in the region? Can we pat ourselves on the back and remind everyone self-righteously that whatever the cost, whatever the inefficiencies of the UN and international community, it is always, always cheaper than war (sixteen times cheaper, says a World Bank economist confidently – I dare not ask how one measures such a thing lest my ignorance be exposed)? Or is it time for ‘mea culpa’, time to let the academics in to explain condescendingly exactly why we got it so wrong once again, why our sequencing was off from the start, why the writing was on the wall but we were too damn arrogant to read it?

The DRC could still turn out to be the biggest success story of the decade, or it could turn out to be the biggest failure. The problem is, the truth is, I don’t know. Oh, it will be easy afterwards, once we know the outcome, to explain the whys and wherefores. But today, as the Supreme Court judges convene in someone else’s office to deliberate the complaint of election irregularities filed by Bemba, three days after a riot outside the Supreme Court turned ugly and the building was shot at, then burnt and ransacked, in the last hours of a 48-hour verbal ‘ultimatum’ from Kabila to the UN to get Bemba’s troops out of Kinshasa or else the national army will do it, with the army already taking position near Bemba’s house – but then let’s not forget that the army itself includes well-placed generals who used to fight for Bemba – I simply don’t know.

The UN say disarmament of armed groups in Kinshasa is the responsibility of the Congolese, that they don't have a mandate to disarm units in Kinshasa. Kabila says the UN is not doing its job. But I understand that the whole ‘ultimatum’ thing was somewhat overly dramatised by the media; the national army will not attack Bemba’s house today. Bemba says he will follow the legal route, but then his people wreak havoc and destroy the records and documents in the Supreme Court. So what will Bemba do if the Supreme Court rejects his complaint? And do the more extreme members of his Union pour la Nation still listen to him anyway?

Meanwhile, I await instruction from Kinshasa about whether or not to return tomorrow.

Photo taken by a friend, cropped beyond recognition by me.