Protests have been building against Morsi in Cairo since last summer. Credit: Gigi Ibrahim/cc by 2.0

By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Jul 4 2013 (IPS)

Wednesday’s coup d’etat against the elected government of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi has placed the administration of President Barack Obama in an uncomfortable position on a number of fronts.

Most immediately, it will be pressed to decide whether Morsi’s ouster constituted the kind of military coup that requires a suspension of some 1.6 billion dollars in U.S. military and economic assistance under U.S. law – a matter that is already being hotly debated both within and outside the administration now.“I think it would be very naïve to assume that this announcement today would necessarily move Egypt back to a democratic trajectory." -- Stephen McInerney of the Project on Middle East Democracy

But U.S. officials are also very concerned about the possibility of a violent reaction to the coup by Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood, which, despite its dramatic decline in public popularity during Morsi’s one-year rule, remains Egypt’s most well organised institution, besides the military. Independent analysts have even suggested that conflict of the kind that wracked Algeria during much of the 1990s cannot be ruled out.

On the home front, the administration is also concerned that it will add ammunition to hawkish Republicans who have argued that Obama’s handling of the “Arab Spring” has been an abject failure and that his alleged “coddling” of the Brotherhood and other Islamist parties that swept elections in the region has backfired to the detriment of U.S. security interests.

Even as the current crisis began to crest Monday when, in the wake of massive anti-government demonstrations Sunday, the military issued an ultimatum for Morsi to work out a power-sharing agreement with his political foes, Republicans were already on the attack.

“The Egyptian turmoil stems from the Morsi government’s predictable power grab, which the Obama administration has been far too accepting of,” House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Republican Ed Royce told the cable blog on foreignpolicy.com. “U.S. aid has failed to compel the Morsi government to undertake the political and economic reforms needed to avert this crisis.”

Hours after the military’s announcement that the Constitution had been suspended and Morsi replaced by an interim government to be headed by the head of the Constitutional Court, the White House issued a statement in Obama’s name stressing that Washington “does not support particular individuals or political parties, but we are committed to the democratic process and respect for the rule of law.”

“(W)e are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian Armed Forces to remove President Morsy and suspend the Egyptian constitution,” the statement said. “I now call on the Egyptian military to move quickly and responsibly to return full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible through an inclusive and transparent process, and avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Morsy and his supporters.”

Under U.S. law, the president must suspend all military and most economic aid whenever a “duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree.” In Egypt’s case, a not inconsiderable 1.3 billion dollars a year in military aid and another 300 million dollars in economic assistance could be at stake pending the installation of a new democratically elected government.

In his statement, Obama said he had directed the relevant U.S. agencies to review the legal implications on U.S. aid of Wednesday’s events.

But it may be difficult for the administration to avoid enforcing the ban. Indeed, the Honduran army followed precisely that scenario after ousting President Jose Manuel Zelaya in 2009, and, despite protests by Republicans and the Pentagon, the administration labelled it a coup and suspended aid.

Washington has much more at stake in Egypt, whose military leaders, with whom the U.S. wants to retain as much influence as possible, have already taken great pains to deny that their action amounted to a coup.

“I think it’s just better to say this was a government that lost its legitimacy in a failed (democratic) transition,” said Robert Springborg, an Egypt expert at the Naval Post-Graduate School.

But whether the military will do so remains a big question, particularly given its previous record, most recently during the failed 17-month rule of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) that took power after the ouster of former President Hosni Mubarak.

The administration should “make it clear to (Egyptian Defence Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah al-) Sisi that Washington would not support the return of the military to politics under the guise of national security and stability. We’ve heard this song before,” said Emile Nakhleh, a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Political Islam Strategic Analysis programme.

“I think it would be very naïve to assume that this announcement today would necessarily move Egypt back to a democratic trajectory,” said Stephen McInerney, the head of the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), which had been strongly critical of the administration’s failure to press Morsi earlier to compromise with his secular opposition or publicly criticise unilateral actions by the ousted president that curbed civil liberties or polarised the country.

“I think there’s reason to really fear a serious escalation of violence in the short term,” McInerney told IPS. “And there are real questions about the rights of Islamists who feel their opportunity to participate in the political process has been undemocratically taken away from them, and the inclusion of the Brotherhood in any future government is an enormously important question.”

His concerns were echoed by the International Crisis Group, which said in a release Wednesday, “The forceful removal of the nation’s first democratically-elected civilian president risks sending a message to Islamists that they have no place in the political order; sowing fears among them that they will suffer yet another blood crackdown; and thus potentially prompting violent, event desperate resistance by Morsi’s followers.”

Obama made much the same point. “The United States continues to believe firmly that the best foundation for lasting stability in Egypt is a democratic political order with participation from all sides and all political parties – secular and religious, civilian and military.

“…The voices of all those who have protested peacefully must be heard – including those who welcomed today’s developments, and those who have supported President Morsy,” his statement said.

Springborg also expressed concern that the reaction of the Brotherhood, many of whose headquarters around the country have been burned down by anti-government protestors in recent days, could be critical.

“The thing that can run this off the rails would be if the Brothers go for the Samson-wrecking option, (although) I don’t think they have that power or the will to do it, because they have too much to lose organisationally and financially,” he said.

In his view, the new leaders must deal with the economic crisis most urgently by appointing civilian technocrats to finalise a long-pending 4.6 billion dollar loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). That, in turn, would spur Saudi Arabia to provide major financial support that it has withheld in part because of its traditional distrust of the Brotherhood.

“When the Saudis come forward, then everyone else will, too,” he said, offering some real momentum to an economy that has spiralled downward under both the SCAF and Morsi.

*The story moved on Jul. 4, 2013 incorrectly quoted Nathan Brown of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace as saying: “(I)f it is clear that what the military has just done in Egypt has ended the career of an anti-democratic leader and the military is materially supporting democratising moves – including, importantly, the stepping aside of the military and genuine transfer of power to a legitimately elected civilian leadership by a certain date – then the United States should support those moves in the most concrete way possible by not interrupting aid.”

Those words were written by David Rothkopf in an article that appeared on the foreignpolicy.com website on Jul. 3, 2013, and were mistakenly attributed to Dr. Brown. IPS apologises for the mistake.

Central African Republic President François Bozizé (in suit) was ousted by a rebel coup on Mar. 24. Credit: Kayikwamba/CC by 2.0

By Arsène Séverin
BRAZZAVILLE, Mar 27 2013 (IPS)

Despite assurances by the leader of the Séléka rebel alliance, self-proclaimed president of the Central African Republic Michel Djotodia, that a “red brigade” would be established to stop the looting and violence that has ensued since Sunday’s coup, citizens do not feel security has been restored.

“We are not safe, even though the rebels have imposed a curfew in Bangui. There is shooting everywhere, which scares us and the children,” Bibi Menbgi, a mother living in the capital Bangui, where electricity and water cuts have persisted since Sunday Mar. 24, told IPS.

“There are fewer armed youths firing in the air and looting, but tensions are still high. (Former President François) Bozizé had been distributing arms to groups of young men,” John Mourassen, a Bangui-based journalist, told IPS.

Djotodia suspended the country’s constitution, government and parliament on Sunday. The African Union condemned the coup d’état and suspended CAR from the regional organisation, issuing a travel ban and an asset freeze against the seven Séléka leaders, including Djotodia. The United Nations Security Council also condemned the suspension of CAR institutions and called for the reinstatement of constitutional rule.

In his first official statement, on Mar. 25 in the CAR capital Bangui, Djotodia indicated that he would implement the Libreville Agreement, a peace accord signed in January between Séléka and Bozizé’s government.

Séléka, a coalition of rebel groups, had launched an offensive against Bozizé’s rule last December.

Djotodia undertook to retain Nicolas Tiangaye, the prime minister of the government of national unity, to set up a new cabinet. The new president also said that he would organise elections within the next three years.

Contrary to Djodotia’s assurances, the Libreville Agreement provided for parliamentary elections in 2014, and a presidential election in 2016 at the end of Bozizé’s second term. The agreement also stipulates that the current leaders of the transition — the president and the ministers — would not stand for election. There are questions as to whether the rebels will respect this clause.

According to Jean Kinga, a lawyer in Brazzaville, the self-proclaimed CAR president is likely to resort to extrajudicial action. “He has suspended all the legislative and judicial institutions, so he has the freedom to do as he likes. There might be reprisals against members of the old regime,” he told IPS.

To gain people’s confidence Djotodia needs to bring all parties together, “particularly the Bozizé camp and the political opposition,” said Mourassen.

Over the weekend, the situation in Bangui escalated after Séléka rebels decided to seize the capital as the Central African Multinational Force, known by its French acronym FOMAC, stood by.

The Central African Multinational Force, which is under the command of Congolese General Guy Pierre Garcia, did not engage in any fighting during the capture of Bangui. Indeed, FOMAC forces are said to have been shot at by the CAR army, which is loyal to Bozizé, who fled Bangui on Mar. 24 for Cameroon. It is reported that his family members took refuge in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Since May 2012, relations between Bozizé and the sitting chair of the Economic Community of Central African States, Chadian President Idriss Deby, cooled after Bozizé rejected his advice to engage in dialogue with his opponents. The 500 Chadian soldiers who made up Bozizé’s closest forces left CAR in October 2012 after he accused them of committing atrocities.

Bozizé was left high and dry by other heads of state in the Central African region in retaliation for ignoring their advice and seeking military protection from South Africa instead.

South African army forces deployed in CAR to protect Bozizé lost at least 13 men in the fighting. South African President Jacob Zuma confirmed the deaths.

Djotodia accused Bozizé of becoming increasingly authoritarian, and of reneging on the Libreville Agreements sponsored by the President of Congo-Brazzaville Denis Sassou Nguesso, the mediator in the CAR crisis.

At the time of writing, the government of Congo-Brazzaville had not made any comment on the coup d’état. However, sources close to the presidency in Brazzaville declared that Bozizé “had violated the Libreville Agreements and consequently lost the trust of President Sassou Nguesso. He no longer deserved support.”

Jonas Mokpendiali, a Central African resident in Bangui since 2003, said that he is concerned about the future of his country. “Nothing seems to change. (Jean-Bédel) Bokassa was ousted, Andre Koligba was ousted, (Ange-Félix) Patassé was ousted and now it’s the turn of Bozizé, who thought he was the master of Bangui with his brutal dictatorship,” he told IPS.

Gabriel Mialoundama, a sociologist at the University of Brazzaville, considers the events in Bangui to be the latest in a long-standing crisis. “From the time he came to power, Francois Bozizé has failed to unite the people. His approach was to exclude his opponents, particularly President Ange-Félix Patassé who died (in 2011) because of his ineptitude. He wasn’t a strong leader,” he told IPS.

“If Djotodia works hard to bring in a new constitution and put the CAR’s house in order by organising elections where he is not a candidate, he will have done the CAR a great service,” Mialoundama added with optimism.

But the academic doubts that the new leader will have a free hand.

“CAR is in the grip of Congo (Brazzaville) and Chad, who are believed to have supported rebels with the blessing of Sassou Nguesso. As they did with Bozizé, Deby and Sassou will maintain their hold on Bangui; Djotodia will be their puppet,” he said.

Days after the sudden fall of the Central African Republic to Séléka rebels, questions are being raised about the circumstances surrounding the hasty departure of President Francois Bozizé.

Explosions could be heard late on Saturday as government forces clashed with the Séléka fighters, who had taken control of a power station in the north and cut the supply during the final battle for control of the country.

Bozizé’s administration gave assurances that everything was under control, but by the following morning, the president had fled, leaving the Séléka – a northern-based rebel coalition – in control of the presidential palace, and much of the rest of the country.

Despite the formation of a national unity government and a January peace deal that briefly ended hostilities, the Séléka continued to seize towns in northern and southeast CAR until the final onslaught on Bangui this weekend.

Shortly after Bozizé’s swift exit, the Séléka issued a communique proclaiming control of CAR. Signed by Secretary-General Justin Kombo Moustapha, and emblazoned with the group’s oval-shaped blue stamp, the group claimed the departure of Bozizé was a fulfillment of the Libreville peace deal, and it urged people to remain calm.

“Prepare to welcome the revolutionary forces of the Seleka,” the communique said.

Professor Andreas Mehler, from the German Institute for Global Area Studies, told Al Jazeera the rebel takeover that ended Bozizé’s decade-long rule may mark the beginning of a more authoritarian regime.

“It could also mean that less inclusionary politics could see the light, particularly with regard to the Muslim part of the population,” Mehler said. “At least some of the rebel components are considered to have such an agenda.”

Fear of reprisals

An official in Cameroon announced Monday that Bozizé had taken sanctuary there. His son is believed to be in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Reports of human rights abuses have surfaced, including allegations of killings, rapes and looting. Residents in some quarters of Bangui have already expressed fear of reprisals for supporting Bozizé.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has condemned the rebel takeover, and the African Union suspended CAR’s membership on Monday.

“We are very concerned by the worsening humanitarian situation in CAR and credible, widespread reports of human rights abuses by both national security forces and Séléka fighters,” said Victoria Nuland, U.S. State Department spokeswoman. “Perpetrators of such abuses must be held accountable.”

Rebel leader Michel Djotodia, meanwhile, has declared himself president, but not all Séléka factions endorse that claim.

Djotodia had been the vice prime minister and defence minister in the unity government until a week ago. He has pledged to keep many ministers in the unity government, including Prime Minister Nicolas Tiangaye.

In an interview with a Central African Republic news agency, Nelson Njadder, leader of the CPSK faction of Séléka, said elections would be held in a year’s time.

But Mehler expressed scepticism over the post-coup announcements, saying the material interests of the group were a key factor in determining the rebels’ future actions. The movement is made up of many “politico-military entrepreneurs,” he said.

“Coup leaders and rebels want to win hearts and minds from the outset and usually announce grandiose things,” Mehler said. “Everything should be taken with a grain of salt. Corporate interests of the rebel combatants … will certainly play a major role (in what happens next).”

Questions are also being asked about Djotodia’s specific role in the ousting of Bozizé.

Unanswered questions

The situation in the Central African Republic deteriorated after five government ministers were detained by the rebels after a Mar. 17 meeting, which also involved representatives from the African Union and United Nations, in the town of Sibut, 185 kilometres north of Bangui.

One of those held by the Séléka was Djotodia, who said the decision to detain the ministers was made by rebels on the ground.

“I am not the one who decided this. There are units who have made this decision,” Djotodia said. “It a type of pressure. They want the head of state to respect the terms of the accord that was signed.”

The Séléka have complained that, under the unity government, their demands for military integration and prisoner releases have been ignored.

Details of what exactly happened last week still remain unclear. Professor Mehler said the circumstances were unknown, but he suggested the hostage taking of the five ministers may have been part of a wider plot to seize power and oust Bozizé.

“It now looks as if the move to ‘arrest’ a couple of ministers, including Michel Djotodia, was just a small ploy in a wider game to install him at the head of CAR,” he said.

The events of the past few days are nothing new to the country. Violence has gripped the Central African Republic since independence from France in 1960. Four major offensives were launched to take Bangui between 1996 and 2003, when acting army chief Bozizé seized power from then-President Angel Felix Patassé in a coup.

On the tenth anniversary of Bozizé’s takeover on Mar. 15, the rebels demanded their grievances be addressed and issued a three-day ultimatum to comply, or face an overthrow. Apparently those demands were not satisfactorily met.

Failure to protect Bangui

Soldiers from the Congo, France, Gabon and South Africa were deployed after the Libreville peace agreement was signed in January.

Thierry Vircoulon, from the International Crisis Group, was critical of the regional armed forces tasked with keeping the peace. Known as the Mission for the Consolidation of Peace in Central African Republic (Micopax), the European Union-funded African force had orders to protect civilians and secure territory in CAR since 2008.

Vircoulon described Micopax’s apparent absence during the recent march on Bangui as “disturbing,” noting South African soldiers appeared to be the only ones who tried to fend off the rebels – a task they paid for with 13 soldiers killed, 27 wounded, and one who remains missing.

“Micopax was not doing anything, but they were supposed to protect Bangui. It was the South African forces who were fighting,” he said in a telephone interview on Monday.

Vircoulon suggested the African coalition forces could and should have engaged the rebels militarily. “I don’t know why this happened. Micopax was there to fight the rebels but they did not, and this let the rebels take the road to Bangui. Perhaps they had instructions … not to do anything,” he said.

“It looks like a similar situation to 2003 when there was a coup by Bozizé. There was also an African force and they didn’t do anything. There is a lot of historical irony in what happened.”

The NGO Conciliation Resources said political turmoil was inevitable because the January peace deal was drafted by an Economic Community of Central African States commission – not by the warring parties.

Coupled with the extended presence of foreign troops, this made Bozizé appear to his critics as overly reliant on external help to solve internal problems, Conciliation Resources’ Kennedy Tumutegyereize and Nicolas Tillon wrote in a commentary.

“Central African Republic has a history of power sharing agreements and political dialogue … What these dialogues have in common are: power-sharing agreements, promise of demobilisation and reintegration of fighters never fully implemented; and a return to violence after a few months.”

While Bozizé and his family safely escaped, the nation of 4.5 million people is left again in disarray with an uncertain future, and an uneasy coalition of rebel factions now firmly in control.

* Published under an agreement with Al Jazeera.

The writer has just confirmed he had recorded the interview and taken notes of the conference, but he incurred in a regrettable error confusing António Soares (Toni Tcheca) with Emílio Krafft Kosta. This is of course completely unprofessional, and we have erased both versions of the story, in Spanish and English. Please accept our sincere apologies.