|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Print this page
|
Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published
by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action
from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived
document may not work.
|
Africa: Albright Trip, 2
Africa: Albright Trip, 2
Date distributed (ymd): 971217
Document reposted by APIC
+++++++++++++++++++++Document Profile+++++++++++++++++++++
Region: Continent-Wide
Issue Areas: +political/rights+ +economy/development+ +US policy focus+
Summary Contents:
This posting and the previous one contain a speech by US Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright in Addis Ababa and a briefing released before her 7-nation
Africa trip by Human Rights Watch/Africa, as well as references to additional
documentation on the trip.
+++++++++++++++++end profile++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's visit to seven African countries
(December 8-15)met with mixed reactions,from praise for the attention given
to new African realities to criticism for her failure to highlight human
rights abuses in several of the countries visited. Albright visited Ethiopia,
Uganda, Rwanda, Angola, Congo (Kinshasa), Zimbabwe and South Africa. In
one US press comment, The New York Times acknowledged that the new leaders
of host countries such as Congo (Kinshasa), Uganda, and Rwanda were undoubtedly
improvements on the previous regimes, but criticized the Secretary of State
for "allowing some of her hosts to use her presence as an advertisement
for American endorsement of their undemocratic regimes."
The Washington Post noted that "Africans who have seen U.S. initiatives
come and go also may be forgiven for wondering how long this one will last.
It's fine to talk about trade and investment, but many African economies
start from so low that they can't get anywhere without some aid and debt
relief. Yet world and U.S. aid to Africa's poorest nations has been dropping
... No sympathetic speech or diplomatic strategy can overcome that kind
of failing."
Additional documentation on the trip, including US government documents
and comments from selected African press, can be found at:
http://www.africanews.org/usaf/albright97.html
Human Rights Watch,
485 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10017-6104
TEL: 212/972-8400; FAX: 212/972-0905; E-mail: hrwnyc@hrw.org
1522 K Street, N.W., Washington D.C. 20005
TEL: 202/371-6592; FAX: 202/371-0124 E-mail: hrwdc@hrw.org;
Web site: http://www.hrw.org
For Further Information
Contact: Janet Fleischman (202) 371-6592 ext.114;
Susan Osnos (212) 972-8400 ext.216;
Alison DesForges (716) 881-2758
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH BRIEFING PAPER FOR SECRETARY ALBRIGHT'S AFRICAN
TOUR
(December 8, 1997)--In a briefing paper prepared for Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright before her African trip, Human Rights Watch urged the
secretary to stress the United States' commitment to human rights, democracy
and the rule of law as essential to breaking cycles of violence. Human
Rights Watch stressed the human rights progress, within the region she
will visit, of South Africa, Botswana, Malawi, and Namibia, as proof that
Africa should be held to the same standards as the rest of the world.
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH BRIEFING PAPER
FOR UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT
DECEMBER 1997
The human rights situation on the African continent requires the sustained
attention of the U.S. government, and Human Rights Watch hopes that Secretary
Albright will underscore the importance that this administration attaches
to respect for human rights in Africa.
This is a time of major political realignment in Africa, evident in
many of the countries on the itinerary, which present U.S. policy with
important and difficult challenges. While it is encouraging that the new
leaders in these countries have all replaced extremely repressive and brutal
governments, they have also exhibited a troubling rejection of international
human rights standards and lack tolerance for multiparty politics, often
justifying their actions as necessary to rebuild their devastated countries.
At this precarious juncture, it is essential that the U.S. displays an
unequivocal commitment to human rights, democracy and the rule of law in
Africa. Ultimately, U.S. efforts to ensure stability in Africa, particularly
in central Africa, demand a firm stand on human rights in order to avoid
future rounds of massive slaughter of civilians and the attendant political
and economic devastation.
The two vastly different parts of the continent on the schedule involve
different kinds of U.S. engagement: central Africa continues to be a tinderbox,
characterized by a series of interconnected crises, a history of genocide
and massive loss of civilian life, and a loss of international credibility;
and southern Africa, source of many of the continent's most positive developments.
South Africa's transformation to a democratic state and its generally positive
engagement with its neighbors continues to benefit the entire region. Despite
clouds on the horizon--notably the threat of violent crime and repressive
responses, but also the failure of the government to deliver on many of
its pre-election promises--South Africa's progress is indeed impressive.
Unfortunately, in Uganda, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Rwanda, parts of southern
Sudan, and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), leaders claim
that the interests of stability require the restriction of political rights.
They contend that African states are not ready for democracy and would
become so only after the development of a thriving economy and an established
middle class. They advocate political systems characterized by restrictive
legal structures that undercut core democratic freedoms, ensuring that
opposition parties, civil society and the media cannot effectively challenge
the party in power. Despite claims to the contrary, the ideology appears
to be a reinstatement of one-party rule, with the difference that private
enterprise is encouraged. The international community has been eager to
overlook the repressive tendencies of the new leaders on the grounds that,
compared to the past, they bring the promise of improvements such as greater
political stability, economic prosperity, and democratization. This relativist
approach to human rights sets a disturbing pattern which has allowed for
some African states to be held to a different, and lesser, set of human
rights standards.
Some voices in the Clinton administration advocate a robust new engagement
with the new leaders in east and central Africa, arguing that the age of
Cold War paternalism is over and that the U.S. should take the lead internationally
in forging strategic alliances with the new leaders. However, the U.S.
should be careful not to simply embrace the new leaders' agenda out of
a sense of guilt over the failures of the international community in the
past; rather, the best way to correct the mistakes of the past is by a
change in political direction. Accordingly, Human Rights Watch believes
that U.S. credibility in the region will more likely be restored by firmness
on human rights, which includes support for civil society and for the moderates,
as well as an insistence on accountability for gross human rights abuses
as a step toward establishing the rule of law. Attempting to buy stability
by unconditioned infusions of bilateral and multilateral aid will only
encourage policies of repression and the rule by force.
Finally, the theme of justice for all should be a cornerstone of U.S.
policy toward the region. International inaction at the time of the slaughter
of civilians in DRC suggests that future massive killings would also provoke
no interference from abroad, a particularly dangerous proposition given
the current insurgency in Rwanda, the ongoing civil war in Burundi, and
the renewed combat in eastern DRC. The tardy and uncertain demand for justice
in the DRC also threatened to undermine the international effort to secure
justice for the Rwandan genocide, which could now be viewed as a matter
of convenience rather than principle. Failure to insist on justice for
the victors in the DRC while prosecuting the genocidal losers of the Rwandan
conflict risks sending the message that it was not violations of international
law that were being punished but rather violations in defeat.
In order to ensure that the human rights issues figure prominently on
the agenda, Human Rights Watch suggests that the following issues in each
country on the itinerary be raised:
THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO
The DRC presents the Clinton administration with one of its toughest
challenges in Africa. The fall of Mobutu has presented an important opportunity
to address the DRC's massive rehabilitation and humanitarian needs while
promoting long-term stability, a transition to democracy, and respect for
human rights and the rule of law. However, the DRC government has both
violated basic human rights and has hindered the U.N. investigation into
the mass killing of civilians. Since May 1997, the Kinshasa authorities
have successfully resisted international pressure, including numerous interventions
by U.S. Ambassador Bill Richardson and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan,
to let the U.N. investigation move forward. The same authorities deny the
basic rights of Congolese and make little progress towards establishing
a democratic state. In many parts of the country, they have engaged in
brutal and arbitrary arrests of those whom they regard as political opponents
and defenders of human rights. They have banned political activity by parties
other than Kabila's Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of
Congo (ADFL) and they named only ADFL members to a commission recently
created to draft the DRC's new constitution. They have restricted freedom
of association and freedom of assembly, and have threatened journalists,
human rights activists, and members of the political opposition. They have
warned organizations of civil society--development NGOs, churches, human
rights groups and others--that they should expect to play only a limited
role in reconstructing and redefining the new DRC, despite their Herculean
efforts over the past several years to serve the population of the decaying
Zairian state.
Human Rights Watch urges the U.S. to make bilateral and multilateral
assistance to the central government contingent upon: 1) demonstrable and
tangible progress in the field investigative phase of the U.N. Investigative
Mission and ultimately in bringing the perpetrators of the massacres to
justice; and 2) improved respect for the rule of law, human rights, and
democratic principles by the DRC government. The latter would include measures
such as lifting the ban on political activity; guaranteeing the participation
of organizations of the Congolese civil society in the reconstruction and
redefining of the new DRC; ceasing harassment of independent voices among
the political opposition, media, and civil society; and a clear commitment
to holding the military accountable for human rights abuses. Periodic evaluation
and monitoring to ensure that benchmarks in these areas are met will be
essential to guarantee that financial aid is well spent and is not serving
to reinforce repressive practices, as was the case under Mobutu. In order
to discourage future rounds of massive civilian slaughter in the region,
it will be particularly important to progressively monitor the DRC government's
cooperation with the U.N. investigation and subsequent efforts to bring
to justice those implicated in crimes against humanity. Further bilateral
aid, such as balance of payments support, should be contingent upon the
progressive implementation of institutional and legal reforms to guarantee
respect for human rights.
ETHIOPIA
The government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi continues to ignore constitutional
rights by not tolerating pluralist party politics, cracking down on critical
media reporting, and seeking to coopt civil society structures such as
labor and professional associations. Its policy of ethnic federalism favored
regional parties affiliated with the ruling EPRDF and clamped down on opposition
groups. Hundreds of civilians have been arbitrarily detained in remote
regions where dissident groups operated; torture and ill-treatment by members
of rural militias, attached to the governing coalition and other security
forces, are common. The trial of 72 top-ranking Derg officials is still
pending. In February, the special prosecutor stated that his office had
brought charges, mainly for genocide, against a total of 5,198 people,
2,246 of whom had been in detention by that time for up to five years,
while the remaining 2,952 were charged in absentia. The government has
also been using criminal prosecutions to eliminate political opponents.
In the past three weeks, the government has arrested the leaders of the
newly established Human Rights League (HLR), and several other prominent
leaders of Oromo community organizations, as part of a government crackdown
against alleged supporters of the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF).
Despite the government's restrictions on political parties, critical
press reporting and independent associations, Ethiopia continues to benefit
from a deferential attitude by the international community. Ethiopia is
the second largest recipient of U.S. aid in sub-Saharan Africa, and the
U.S. and the E.U. have increased their aid to Ethiopia, without using this
financial leverage to secure human rights improvements. The augmented U.S.
aid included military assistance in the name of fighting Sudanese terrorism.
RWANDA
Rwanda continues to be plagued by insecurity in the northwest, with
attacks by Hutu insurgents resulting in a brutal counterinsurgency campaign
by the government. By October, an estimated 3,500 unarmed civilians had
been killed by the government in the course of military operations. In
several particularly egregious cases of military abuses, the government
has brought officers to trial, but in all except the most recent case,
the accused have been acquitted of all serious charges and only punished
lightly for lesser crimes.
Against the backdrop of increasing violence by both the government and
the insurgents, the beginning of trials for genocide offered one sign of
hope. The first trials failed to meet international standards in several
respects, most importantly because the accused had no legal representation.
The conduct of trials in a number of courts has improved in recent months,
although not in all cases. Such improvements did not alleviate the persistent
problem of threats against defense witnesses, lawyers and judges which
has marred the process since the beginning. With the massive return of
Rwandans from abroad, military and administrative offices once more began
making arrests without legal authority and without following legal procedure.
They also began once more holding detainees in irregular places of detention.
By October, more than 120,000 persons were held in inhumane conditions,
crammed into prisons and communal jails. Soldiers and administrative officials
have confined hundreds of civilians in military camps or facilities under
military control after having arrested them in cordon-and-search operations
in conflict areas and in urban centers.
Rwandan troops crossed the border into eastern DRC in late 1996 to empty
the camps that sheltered more than one million Rwandans. In the months
that followed, Rwandan troops and their Congolese allies chased down camp
residents who fled west, killing thousands of noncombatants as well as
soldiers and militia accompanying them.
The international community persists in overlooking or excusing Rwandan
abuses as a cost of rebuilding a nation shattered by genocide or accepting
without challenge official denials of responsibility. International actors
rarely criticized abuses, whether victims were Rwandans or even citizens
of their own nations. Condemnation of the murder of five staff members
of the U.N. human rights field operation, for example, was so muted as
to dishearten their colleagues.
UGANDA
President Museveni continues to implement his "no-party" political
system and has placed increasingly severe restrictions on the activities
of political parties. The 1995 constitution had already restricted the
functioning of political parties by prohibiting a wide range of political
activities, and a bill currently under consideration would further regulate
their activities. Similar restrictions have also been placed on civil society
and the press. Massive human rights violations continue to be committed
by the rebels fighting the Ugandan government and, to a lesser extent,
by the Ugandan army itself. In the north and west of Uganda, the government
has created "protected villages" where local residents are encouraged
to move and where conditions are poor. Given the important leadership role
that President Museveni plays in the region and the widespread perception
that he is the "darling" of many Western countries, it is especially
important that the U.S. take a consistent stand on human rights issues
in Uganda.
Human Rights Watch/Africa
The Africa division of Human Rights Watch was established in 1988 to
monitor and promote the observance of internationally recognized human
rights in sub-Saharan Africa. Peter Takirambudde is the executive director;
Janet Fleischman is the Washington director; Suliman Ali Baldo is the senior
researcher; Alex Vines is the research associate; Bronwen Manby and Binaifer
Nowrojee are counsels; Ariana Pearlroth and Juliet Wilson are associates;
Alison DesForges is a consultant; and Peter Bouckaert is the Orville Schell
Fellow. William Carmichael is the chair of the advisory committee.
This material is being reposted for wider distribution by the Africa
Policy Information Center (APIC), the educational affiliate of the Washington
Office on Africa. APIC's primary objective is to widen the policy debate
in the United States around African issues and the U.S. role in Africa,
by concentrating on providing accessible policy-relevant information and
analysis usable by a wide range of groups and individuals.
|
