Peace determinants in the Great Lakes: wealth or democracy?

The Great Lakes Region has been blighted by civil wars and conflict over many decades; and also has been the theatre of many activities by the United Nations whose stated goal is to engage in efforts to bring peace and stability. Some of the continuous and deliberate associations with the region include genocide, political instability, armed conflicts, porous borders and humanitarian crisis; and of course along with tensions over natural resources and other potentially destabilising factors. The region is also renowned for its beauty, rolling green volcanic hills surrounding vast lakes, large mineral resource deposits and recently discovered oil reserves all of which, if used effectively, could turn the economic and political tides of the region for good. The nagging question, however, is whether the people of this region can ever attain peace. Some would say, the conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo has ended since the M23 was militarily defeated. But does the silence of guns mean peace? Others would disagree and claim that for as long as other rebel groups roam around freely, then peace in the region will forever be elusive. Could anyone envisage more 50 years of another protracted war? Or is there something innate about the people of the region that makes them hard wired for war? One cannot hide or run from history. The region is associated with tragic history of war and genocide and this nightmare does not need to go on forever. The past mistakes that caused untold human suffering and stalled human development should squarely be put on the leaders of the past, but also those of today who have an even tougher responsibility to live up to the rising expectations of their citizens. These are the people who have historically had a bad deal from their leaders. Why does it seem too difficult for African leaders to get rid of their old habits of brutality, cronyism, corruption, crime, and nepotism? In the realm of politics, power and status are what all governments seek and will use overt and covert means to achieve their intended objectives. The methods and tactics used to gain influence are sometimes cunning and deceitful even though these actions can be judged to be morally reprehensible by the public; but again this is the exact point of putting political expediency above morality. Can politicians be morally good or politics is indeed pre-destined to involve dirty hands and loss of integrity, as many political philosophers would claim? Some African politicians can easily fall into this category given that many history books are littered with dictatorial and genocidal regimes and crimes over which they reigned. Today, the Great Lakes Region faces enormous challenges of economic and political nature and some of which are residues of post-colonial problems to state and nation-building, and others linked to the recent history of the Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. In trying to sort out some of these issues, a new breed of committed citizenry is needed in order to hold their leaders accountable, but also to engage in the process of healing the wounds, paying attention to historical injustices and calling for genuine unity and reconciliation in the region. By reconciling the past and present, then the focus should be on creating long-term economic opportunities and raising aspirations for a better future. Going forward, the region ought to choose the right path and this is about embracing the future and looking beyond the short-term comfort that is often provided by short military victories. Defeating and dismantling rebel groups cannot and will not bring an immediate peace and prosperity; hence other means to create the region’s wealth and repair the social damage are needed. Why can’t regional leaders be independent enough and stand up to the external manipulation and influence – and use the great economic resources available to build the regional industrial base? Will the often spoken economic potentials of the region ever mean anything? Or how long can the GLR remain in this mediocre position while its politicians repeat their empty promises – conferences after conferences? One could argue that economics is the predominant force in the promotion of peace and a precondition for mitigating the tensions in the GLR. A more genuine and deeper integration of the region’s economies would undoubtedly bring positive development, but if and only the region’s leaders were united against external forces bent to keep the region into their servitude. One is not somehow oblivious to the failures of liberal economics but seriously believes that economic integration could play a key part in providing a higher standard of living to this susceptible region, and the wealth creation would undoubtedly be a key part in attaining sustainable peace. Others consider democracy as one of the best Determinants of peace. Politics in the GLR however often means something entirely different. The region is no stranger to ethnic politics which has dominated the political spaces since the independence era; and has consequently damaged people’s trust in political systems due to its destructive nature. Clearly, the GLR was identified as a profitable terrain for everyone wanting to invest into community conflicts. Unfortunately, no one benefits from this unattractive political game because it only yields deaths and displacement of the population either internally or outside of the country. Does this mean democracy cannot flourish in the GLR? The answer is no because these atrocious results are not innate or embedded into community culture or their respective positive values. They are direct effects of a lengthy politicised, forged and fabricated process of self-interested politicians, specialists into manipulating community’s grievances. Therefore, it calls into question the role of political game and state absence or unwillingness to establish a ground for ceasing community claims manipulation. The GLR should be proud of its diversity and acknowledge that various ethnic groups are important parts of social structure. The question in the region is whether people have gone beyond their ethnic differences and are ready to embrace and handle the often challenging democratic processes. In a region where everyone still sees himself and his community’s interests and where many still have unsolved grievances – community identities had been used for discriminating, rejecting, claiming, killing and settling accounts; the journey to political and democratic maturity remains a long one. In the end, wealth and democracy are only tools and neither of them can bring peace to the GLR without ‘grown up’ leaders. It is okay to argue that the main problem of achieving peace in the region is that there no democracies, but remember that both economic and political detriments have far-reaching practical implications. If the region’s wealth were to be used effectively, the economic and social development would reduce the fundamental motivation for violence, eventually providing the solution to the GLR conflicts. The author is a researcher in Diplomacy and International Law based in the United Kingdom

Opinions

Peace determinants in the Great Lakes: wealth or democracy?