ZAIRE-U.S.: Washington’s Confusion Mirrors Kinshasa’s

By Jim Lobe Reprint | | Print |

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Apr 10 1997 (IPS) - Amid growing confusion in both Washington and Kinshasa, the White House denies that it has asked President Mobutu Sese Seko to resign and leave Zaire, even as it insists that the Zairean leader’s 31-year eeign is effectively finished.

With reports that Zaire’s second largest city, Lubumbashi, has fallen to rebels led by Laurent Kabila, Washington appears to be hoping that U.N.-sponsored cease-fire talks which adjourned Tuesday in South Africa may yet result in an accord that will permit an “orderly transition” to a new government.

“What we are now seeking are negotiations that will lead to settlement of the conflict between the government and the rebels and … an orderly transition that establishes a government that can function on behalf of the people of Zaire,” White House spokesman Mike McCurry said Wednesday.

But some independent analysts here say that a democratic transition cannot realistically get underway until Mobutu steps down. They are calling on Washington to press the Zairean leader to leave.

“Any prolongation of Mobutu’s rule is very dangerous,” says Salih Booker, Africa director of the influential Council on Foreign Relations. “Now is the time for him to get out.”

The comments from the White House capped a 24-hour series of statements and reports about U.S. policy towards Zaire that, in some ways, mirrored the chaotic situation in the mineral-rich central African nation itself.

In testimony before the Africa subcommittee of the House of Representatives Tuesday, Assistant Secretary of State George Moose repeatedly declined to call for Mobutu to step down, suggesting instead that the Zairean leader still had a constructive role to play in a transition process.

On Wednesday, however, the Washington Post reported in a front- page story that the administration of President Bill Clinton has been quietly pressing Mobutu to step down and go into exile. Quoting unidentified administration sources, the paper said that Washington had conveyed these messages through Mobutu’s closest African allies, including Morocco’s King Hassan and Gabon’s president, Omar Bongo.

In an informal chat with reporters Wednesday morning, McCurry appeared to confirm the Post’s account when he told them, “Mobutuism is about to become a creature of history.”

But, just two hours later, he appeared to change the administration’s line once more. “We have not suggested that Mr. Mobutu should resign or should go into exile,” he said. “That is … for the people of Zaire to decide,” he added in an echo of the official U.S. policy that has prevailed since October, when Kabila’s rebel Alliance of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo (ADFL) first launched its campaign from the Rwandan-Zairean border.

If that were not confusing enough, the State Department voiced frustration with the latest turn of events in Kinshasa where Mobutu Wednesday fired his prime minister, Etienne Tshisekedi.

Mobutu replaced him with Gen. Lukulia Bolongo, a former army chief of staff. Tshisekedi, a long-time opposition leader believed to enjoy widespread popular support, especially in the key central province of Kasai, was appointed premier just last week.

After his appointment, he moved to dissolve parliament and offered Kabila’s alliance half a dozen cabinet posts, including the foreign and defence ministries. Those moves, which were rejected by Kabila, alienated much of the political elite in Kinshasa, and may have set the stage for his ouster Wednesday, according to analysts here.

State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns expressed exasperation over the uncertainties created by Mobutu’s latest move. “We need to get to the bottom of this,” he said, suggesting that there may now be two claimants to the premiership. “Obviously, it’s a question of major importance because the Zairean government has to negotiate an end to the civil war; it has to provide for public security; it has to be a functioning government.”

To sort out the situation, Burns called on the government and the parliament to consult on the selection of a prime minister.

Like McCurry, Burns insisted that the “era of Mobutu is over.” But when or how he goes, Burns added, “is really up to him…(and) up to the Zairean people, its government (and) its opposition… That cannot be a question for the United States to decide.”

Burns also stressed the potential importance of the U.N.- and South Africa-sponsored talks between Kabila’s alliance and the government, the first round of which concluded Tuesday outside Pretoria.

He said Washington was “pleased” by agreements reached by the two parties on their commitment to Zaire’s territorial integrity, to negotiations, and the need for “fundamental and democratic change in Zaire,” including elections. Burns said Washington hoped the talks would resume very soon.

Given the speed with which Kabila’s alliance has moved, virtually unopposed, across all of eastern Zaire over the past six months, many analysts have questioned the relevance of those talks. Some have also expressed concern that, by including only the government and the rebels, the talks risk pushing the democratic opposition to the margins.

But officials here insist that the talks offer the best hope for negotiating a transition to the post-Mobutu era. Despite boasts by Kabila that his troops are moving towards Kinshasa, they do not expect any major new military moves for at least a few weeks once Lubumbashi, a key mining centre in Shaba province, is secured.

“We have a window of opportunity in which to press both sides for an accord,” said one official. “Negotiations will begin to supersede action in the field,” he added.

Other officials expressed relief over Tshisekedi’s replacement. They argued that Tshisekedi, who has often denounced Washington’s Cold War backing for Mobutu, had largely discredited himself by last week’s actions and, in any event, was unable to bind “the guys with guns” to any transition process.

But some independent analysts and lawmakers argue that Washington’s failure to back Tshisekedi sends a discouraging message to the unarmed democratic opposition at a key moment in the unfolding crisis.

“These people have paid a high price for their opposition to Mobutu,” according to Salih Booker. “It’s very troubling that we should ignore them at this moment just because they don’t have guns.”