Emma Emeozor [email protected]
Coming at a time when leaders of the Lake Chad Basin Commission (LCBC) are preoccupied with the menace of Boko Haram, the recent attempt by Chadian rebels based in southern Libya to overrun the country and seize power raises concerns.
But for the swift response of French troops, Chad would have been thrown into another civil war with disastrous repercussions for the Lake Chad Basin. Chad is not only a strategic member of the LCBC but also a member of the African Union Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJF) mandated to eradicate Boko Haram insurgents.
The rebels’ determination to sack the government of President Idriss Deby was demonstrated in the coordinated convoy of armed men and their tough resistance to the joint French-Chadian airstrikes. For four days, they refused to capitulate to the superior firepower of the French troops.
Unable to repel the rebels who had hit the road with 40 pickup trucks on February 1 and 2, the Chadian government called for support from French soldiers who responded with airstrikes on Tuesday and Wednesday last week, destroying no fewer than 20 of the trucks.
The advancing rebels retreated and, barely 24 hours later, they embarked on another advance to Chad with a convoy of about 50 pickup trucks. Again, the quick response of French troops aborted the incursion. This was after they had crossed 400 kilometres (250 miles) of Chadian territory.
French Foreign, Minister Jean-Yues Le Drian who appeared before the country’s Parliament confirmed that Deby appealed for help. He said: “There was an attack by a rebel group that came from southern Libya… to take power by force in N’djamena. President Deby asked us in writing to intervene to prevent a coup d’etat and protect his country.
The Union of Forces of Resistance (UFR) launched the offensive with the confidence that the French government would not intervene on behalf of the Chadian government. But they were wrong. An official of the group reportedly said “the aim is to bring Deby down.”
He was quick to confess they did not consider the likelihood of French support for Deby: “We thought France would not intervene in Chad’s internal affairs, but it appears that it is offering no solutions for the Chadian people beyond keeping Deby in power to do their dirty work in the region.”
France has a 4,500-strong counter-terrorism military contingent based in the Chadian capital, N’djamena, under Operation Barkhane.
The UFR is a rebel coalition established in 2009 following a partial success in the bid to sack Deby. The rebel Military Command Council for the Salvation of the Republic (CCMSR) is based in southern Libya. Its members include Sudan’s ex-Dafur rebels and allies of former Chadian President Hissen Habre, who was overthrown by Deby and is currently serving life sentence in a Senegalese prison. UFR is a formidable armed group that cannot be underrated.
Only in December 2018, the leaders of LCBC met and “reaffirmed their commitment to the accelerated implementation of the Regional Stabilisation Strategy in the areas of Lake Chad affected by the Boko Haram.”
It should be a matter of concern to members of the commission that, barely a month after the summit, Chadian rebels are rooting to set up a new government. The emergence of a new government in Chad has potent dangers for the process of stabilising the region as envisaged by the commission. This is because the leadership of the rebels is likely to jettison any agreement or treaty approved by the administration of Deby. Put differently, the outbreak of a civil war would jeopardise all the efforts the region’s leaders are deploying to ensure political and economic stability.
What is now clear is that the rebels are not daunted by the failure of their latest move to seize the country from Deby. They have issued a stern warning to France over its “illegal” interference in the internal affairs of Chad. In a joint statement, the armed groups, including UFR, CCMSR, UFDD and CAD, called on France to “stop backing President Idriss Deby’s government through its air strikes.”
Describing the air strikes as “illegal in a purely Chadian conflict,” they said it was an “unacceptable interference France’s role in the crisis.”
The political arm of the group reportedly said: “Through these bombings, France once again confirms its unwavering support so decided by the Chadian democratic forces, whose victories in the various elections have been stolen.”
The condemned what it described as “France’s unconditional and permanent support for a dictatorship hated and rejected by its people,” and demanded “the immediate cessation of this technical, logistical and military assistance from France to the regime of Deby.”
Interestingly, the group asked “French and African democrats to join this cause in condemning the irrational interference of the French army in Chad.” What they failed to realise was that democrats believe in the power of the ballot box and not the power of guns to change governments. It is, therefore, a mockery of the tenets of democracy for rebel groups to seek the support of democrats.
Since its independence in 1960, Chad has remained an unstable country. The struggle for power among the country’s elite, in addition to the role played by Libya and Sudan under the government of former strongman Muammar Gaddafi and President Omar al-Bashir, respectively, cannot be forgotten too soon.
The leadership of Libya and Sudan unleashed untold hardship and poverty on the people through their divisive style of interventions. When Gaddafi could not annex parts of the country, he resorted to instigating regime change through the use of force. He made Libya a military training base for aspiring Chadian leaders who were willing to dance to his tune. Habre was his product until they fell apart. Gaddafi later adopted Deby, who was Habre’s ally and chief of staff. Though Gaddafi is no longer alive, southern Libya has remained a base for Chadian rebels.
Deby’s government has been spending huge amounts of money on arms and ammunition instead of infrastructures and the welfare of the citizens, yet there are no indications that his government will crush the rebels soon. This is the unfortunate story of Chad since it attained independence in 1960. But for how long would Chad remain a weeping and beggarly nation? For how long would the country’s elite exploit the religious and ethnic differences of the people to achieve their selfish political ambitions?
Though these questions may remain unanswered, the situation in Chad should be a matter of concern to the LCBC, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU). Presently, the focus of the LCBC is the fight against Boko Haram. Who controls political power is the thrust of the conflict in Chad and the other countries of the region.
Ethnicity, religious bias, nepotism, favoritism, power tussle, intolerance, insincerity of purpose, to mention a few, are among the many ills hindering the development and growth of LCBC countries.
Chad may remain a theatre of war, except the country’s elite are willing to sink their differences in the interest of national unity, peace and development. It is for this reason that members of the LCBC, ECOWAS and AU must begin to review their position as it concerns the crisis in Chad.
It is disturbing that Libya continues to provide a base for Chadian rebels’ years after the death of Gaddafi. The argument that there is no government in Libya is unacceptable. The AU might not have viewed the situation with the seriousness it deserves.
The AU, LCBC and ECOWAS should in strong terms declare their condemnation of the support Chadian rebels are getting from Libya. As it is now, nothing will deter those who stand to benefit from the conflict situation in Chad except there is imposition of sanctions on those who encourage or instigate political crisis in neighbouring countries.
A comprehensive conflict resolution mechanism is required to resolve the conflicts in the countries of the Lake Chad basin. It must be noted that victory for UFR would inspire Boko Haram leaders and vice-versa, as both groups have links with Islamic State.
Also, the argument of non-interference in the internal affairs of neighbours is absolutely absurd when it is clear that a member nation lacks the capacity to resolve internal conflicts that have become a threat to the stability of the entire region.
Oftentimes, African leaders procrastinate, waiting for conflicts to deteriorate to unmanageable proportions, before they start calling for restraint. But a stitch in time saves nine. African leaders should demonstrate maturity, sincerity and astuteness in the handling of conflicts. It is unimaginable what would have happened if the French government had rejected Chad’s appeal for support when the rebels were advancing to N’Djamena.
African leaders should promote a paradigm that would guarantee democracy, justice, egalitarian society, respect for human rights, good governance and the win-win spirit. As long as these norms and virtues are absent, the hope for political stability and development in the region may remain a mirage.
The arrest, trial and consequent life sentence for Habre was hailed across the continent and beyond. The thinking at the time was that it would heal the wounds and pains inflicted on the people of Chad. Observers had argued that it would encourage the various factions to embrace peace and dialogue in resolving the problems of the country.
But it would seem the factional leaders did not learn a lesson from the dictatorship of Habre and the outcome of his trial. To what extent has Deby distanced himself from Habre’s style of leadership? Deby seized power from Habre in 1990; 29 years after, he is still on the throne. He transformed from a military leader to a civilian leader. Even now, there are no clear indications that he is ready to relinquish power. So, the situation in Chad is that of the re-cycling of a ‘Habre-Deby’ system.
A visionary leader would know that when the patience of the citizenry is unduly taxed, anarchy is always the result. The argument that the rebels are receiving intelligence from the citizens cannot be dismissed, with 29 years of Deby’s rule, and no improvement in the living conditions of the people as expected. Rather, their woes continue to increase daily.
Deby would be the hero of the people if he chooses to imbibe democratic norms and values and allows free, fair and credible elections. The people must be allowed to decide through the ballot box who rules the country. The president cannot monopolise power and expect total support from the people.
He cannot win the fight against the rebels without the full backing of the people. Chadians, irrespective of ethnic, religious and political affiliation, must be made to have a sense of belonging.