CE QUI EST BON POUR LE PEUPLE RUSSE
EST AUSSI BON
POUR LE PEUPLE DE LA
REPUBLIQUE DEMOCRATIQUE DU CONGO:
Par Fungula Fumu Ngondji
Journaliste independant et militant de la lutte de liberation,
Auteur du livre recemment publie The Kongo of My Ancestors.
(Avec des extraits tires de New York Times International et CNN news du 12/7/11)
Le Secretaire d’Etat des US, Hillary Rodham Clinton a ete accuse jeudi de provoquer des incidents en Russie après avoir exprime des critiques a propos des
elections recentes dans ce pays.
Mme Clinton a ouvertement critique les elections allant jusqu’a prononcer des declarations a partir de lundi après la publication des premiers rapports des
resultats electoraux par les observateurs de l’Organisation pour la Securite et la Cooperation en Europe.
“Le people Russe”, a declare Mme Clinton lundi a Bonn (Germany) ou elle participe a une conference sur l’Afghanistan en compagnie du ministre Russe
des affaires etrangeres, Sergey V. Lavrov, “a le
droit, comme tout autre people a travers le monde de faire entendre sa voix et d’etre assure que ses votes seront comptes. Cela veut dire qu’il merite des elections libres, honnetes et
transparentes et des leaders qui lui sont redevables” a-t-elle ajoute.
“Les observateurs avaient issus des rapports peu flateurs faisant entendre qu’ils etaient preoccupes par les problemes d’ordre structurel notamment qu’il
n’existe pas de separation entre le gouvernement et le parti United Russia de Mr. Putin, actuellement au pouvoir.
“Petros Efthymiou, un coordinateur de la mission des observateurs a cite notamment l’interference de l’etat a tous les
niveaux de la vie politique nationale; l’absence des conditions necessaires pour une competition electorale libre et honnete et l’impossibilite pour les media d’exercer un jugement
independent.”
Un reportage de M. Herszenhorn depuis Moscou, et de Lee Myers depuis Bruxelles. Michael Schwirtz y a
contribute depuis Moscou. Traduit de l’Anglais par Fungula Fumu Ngondji
QUE DIT Mme CLINTON
A PROPOS DES ELECTIONS
EN REPUBLIQUE
DEMOCRATIQUE DU CONGO ?
Nous voudrions soumettre a son attention le document intitule:“Le Congo a la Croisee des
chemins.” Nous esperons qu’elle aura la meme opinion sur le people Congolais qu’elle a pour le people Russe.
:“Le Congo a la Croisee des chemins.”
Note de l’Editeur: Gambino est celui qui a reouvert la mission de l’USAID au Congo en 1997 et est revenu plus tard pour la diriger de
2001-2004; O’Hanlon est un academique de niveau superieur a l’Institut Brookings et auteur du nouveau livre The Wounded Giant: America’s Armed Forces in an
Age of Austerity (Le Geant Blesse: Les
Forces Armees Americaines a l’Heure de l’Austerite); tous les deux sont des anciens membres volontaires du Corps de la Paix des annees 1980 au Congo, quand le pays s’appelait
Zaire.
Par Tony Ganbino et Michael O’Hanlon – Special a CNN
La semaine derniere des millions d’habitants de la Republique Democratique du Congo se sont rendus en masse prendre part aux elections
presidentielles et parlementaires. Malheureusement, a cause de myriades d’erreurs dans le processus de l’organisation du scrutiny, les elections elles-memes ont ete marrees par la
desorganisation, fraude et violence. Et les Congolais, aussi bien que la communaute mondiale sont confrontes maintenant a une situation tragique.
La desorganisation du processus electoral arrive en supplement a tant d’autres problemes cruciaux que connait deja le Congo, lesquels le
placent a la queu sur la liste du Developpement du Monde publie par l’ONU. On s’attend maintenant a des nouvelles violences dans un pays qui a déjà vu tant de morts causes par les guerres,
jamais connues nul part ailleurs dans le monde depuis la fin de la Guerre Froide. Au dela des contigences humanitaires, le Congo est litteralement a la croisee des chemins de l’Afrique,
deuxieme plus grand pays du continent et troisieme plus people; entoure de neuf other etats, y compris l’Angola, Ruanda, Burundi et Ouganda. Tout l’avenir du continent depend de ce qui se passe
ici.
Le Centre Carter qui a observe les elections au Congo a indique dans son rapport preliminaire a la suite du scrutin: “Le niveau de la desorganisation existant dans certains
bureaux de vote a pousse nos observateurs a donner une evaluation defavorable sur 16 percent des cas.” Ceci montre qu’il y a eu des difficulties severes de voter dans 15-20% des bureaux. De plus,
il y a avait des rapports credibles sur la presence des ballots remplis dans des urnes, des menaces d’intimidation et tant d’autres violations electorales.
Mardi, le President de la Commmission Electorale Congolaise, le Reverend Daniel Mulunda-Nyanga se propose d’annoncer les resultats interimaires de l’election Presidentielles ( nous ne connaitrons pas les resultats des elections Parlementaires jusque l’annee prochaine). Comme attendu, la competition est entre deux candidats. Joseph Kabila, le president sortant et Etienne Tshisekedi, le legendaire veteran de l’Opposition Congolaise.
Mardi, le President de la Commmission Electorale Congolaise, le Reverend Daniel Mulunda-Nyanga se propose d’annoncer les resultats interimaires de l’election Presidentielles ( nous ne connaitrons pas les resultats des elections Parlementaires jusque l’annee prochaine). Comme attendu, la competition est entre deux candidats. Joseph Kabila, le president sortant et Etienne Tshisekedi, le legendaire veteran de l’Opposition Congolaise.
Le Reverend Mulunda est lie au President Kabila. Cette relation et les actions de Mulunda comme ses declarations pendant la periode electorale laissent
penser qu’il a peu de credibilite comme un acteur impartial parmi les Congolais. Nombreux dans le milieu de la communaute internationale doutent egalement de son impartialite. Ce faisant, meme
l’intervention de la Cour Supreme Congolaise dans la resolution des conflicts provenant des resultats du scrutin n’inpire pas confiance a de nombreux Congolais etant donne que les membres de
cette cour supreme sont des fideles de Kabila qui n’ont jamais montre la moindre impartialite dans le passé.
Tenant compte de toutes ses difficulties et la problematique de tabulation des resultats de ces elections, il sera exceptionnellement difficile de connaitre le gagnant a la fin d’une election si close. Surtout s’il faut considerer qu’au moins 20% des bureaux de vote ont connu des irregularities, meme des violations electorales, sans oublier que le processus de tabulation est lui aussi irregulier et desorganise dans un environnement absent de neutralite et d’impartialite cree par la Commission Congolaise Electorale guaranteuse du scrutiny. On peut alors se demander comment les Congolais peuvent accepter en toute confiance qui ils ont choisi pour leur future president?
Tenant compte de toutes ses difficulties et la problematique de tabulation des resultats de ces elections, il sera exceptionnellement difficile de connaitre le gagnant a la fin d’une election si close. Surtout s’il faut considerer qu’au moins 20% des bureaux de vote ont connu des irregularities, meme des violations electorales, sans oublier que le processus de tabulation est lui aussi irregulier et desorganise dans un environnement absent de neutralite et d’impartialite cree par la Commission Congolaise Electorale guaranteuse du scrutiny. On peut alors se demander comment les Congolais peuvent accepter en toute confiance qui ils ont choisi pour leur future president?
Une question pourtant d’urgence si l’on tient compte du risque repandu de voir le pays retomber de nuveau dans des violences horribles avec des
demonstrations de protestation massives par les partisans de Tshisekedi qui seraient repoussees avec violence par les forces de securite de Kabila sans imaginer combien de massacres en suivraient
dans les rues du Congo. Cela conduirait a plus d’instabilite, plus de violence, une descente totale dans le chaos dans un pays deja exsangue depuis les quinze dernieres annees et qui, en ce
moment, n’est gouvernable dans sa partie est que dans quelques coins isoles.
Une situation pareille serait pire. La communaute internationale et le president Kabila devraient prendre conscience de cette realite. Une des
lecons apprises en 2011 est qu’une fois le movement pour le changement des peuples a prisracine, la resistance des forces gouvernementales mene soit a la chute du regime soit a son otracisme.
Aucune de ces perspectives ne devrait etre envisagee par quiconque dans un pays comme le Congo, si desespere aujourd’hui pour l’aide, les echanges, la relance economique et le retour a une vie
normale.
L’espoir serait cependant que l’une des isntitutions les plus appreciees par la loi Congolaise, l’Eglise Catholique, autant egalement que par
le Centre Carter et d’autres acteurs, publie les resultats des differents bureaux de votes en sa disposition. “La publication des resultats de vote de chaque bureau serait (est), ainsi que
prevu par la loi electorale, la seule voie pour guarantir que l’election reflete la volonte du people”, a declare le Centre Carter.
Tel est aussi l’avis, longtemps exprime par James Entwistle, l’Ambassadeur des USA au Congo et par bien d’autres dans le souci d’etablir la
validite des resultats des elections.
Une fois cela etabli, un autre probleme pourrait neanmoins jaillir si la difference des voies entre les deux candidats est si etroite due aux
fraudes evidentes et/ou a la desorganisation. En pareil cas, une mission de mediation credible comprenant des representants des pays Africains neutres pourrait probablement intervenir pour aider
le Congo a eviter le pire. Les Etats-Unis doit supporter une telle initiative.
En 2006, l’election presidentielle opposait deux hommes: President Kabila et Jean-Pierre Bemba. Un grand nombre de Congolais n’avaient pas
confiance dans le processus mais le Centre Carter a pu declarer ce qui suit:”La mission d’observation du Centre Carter en Republique Democratique du Congo assure que les resultats announces par
la Commission Independante Electorale (CEI) sont consistents avec les resultats obtenus dans les bureaux de votes. Et avec les tabulations des temoins des candidats de chaque bureau de vote
dument compares. Cette declaration apporta une preuve sur la transparency et l’assurance que la fraude etait absente après la tabulation des resultats.”
Ce processus doit etre immediatement repete de maniere a etablir les criteres de transparence et redonner confiance au peuple
Congolais dans les resultats des elections autant que pour eviter une nouvelle catastrophe au pays. Le monde doit egalement eviter de faciliter une victoire entachee d’irregularites uniquement
pour assurer Kabila d’un deuxieme mandat sans conviction comme cela semle etre la voie la plus aisee. Notre lecture de la politique Congolaise actuelle nous amene a conclure qu’une telle
strategie ne serait nullement stabilisante; au contraire, elle serait incendiaire. Bien que la communaute internationale dispose d’un leverage par la presence d’une force de 19,000 soldats de
l’ONU au Congo en cette periode d’eveil politique des peuples apporte par les peuples de la Tunisie, Egypte, Libya, Cote d’Ivoire, Burma et au dela, ce ne serait pas le meilleur moment de
permettre une nouvelle forme d’autocracie au coeur de l’Afrique.
Les vues exprimes dans cet article sont eclusivement celles de Tony Gambino et Michael O’Hanlon. Traduites de l’Anglais par Fungula Fumu Ngondji.
ENGLISH VERSION
Les vues exprimes dans cet article sont eclusivement celles de Tony Gambino et Michael O’Hanlon. Traduites de l’Anglais par Fungula Fumu Ngondji.
ENGLISH VERSION
TO THE ATTENTION OF MRS.CLINTON:
WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE
IS ALSO GOOD FOR
THE PEOPLE OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
OF CONGO
By Fungula Fumu Ngondji
Independent journalist; freedom fighter and author of the recently published book The Kongo of My
Ancestors
( With excerpts from the New York Times and CNN of 12/7/11)
The Secretary of State of the US, Hillary Rodham Clinton was accused on Thursday of inciting unrest in Russia after she expressed critical
opinion about the recent elections in the country.
WHAT HAS MRS. CLINTON SAID
ABOUT THE
ELECTIONS IN THE
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO?
We would like to submit to her attention the following document: “Congo's crucial crossroads.” We hope she will have the same opinion for the Congo people as
she has shown for the Russian.
Editor's Note:Gambino reopened the USAID mission in the Congo in 1997
and returned to Congo to run the Mission from 2001-2004; O’Hanlon is senior fellow at Brookings and author of the new book The Wounded Giant: America’s Armed Forces in an Age of
Austerity; both were Peace Corps Volunteers in Congo in the 1980s, when it was known as Zaire.
ByTony Gambino and Michael O’Hanlon - Special to CNN
Last week, millions of people turned out in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to vote in Presidential and Parliamentary elections. Unfortunately, because of myriad mistakes in the run-up to the polling, the elections themselves were marred by disorganization, fraud, and violence. And Congolese, as well as the world community, now face a fraught moment.
The electoral dysfunctionality comes on top of Congo’s other huge problems that have put it dead last in the U.N.’s World Development Index. It now risks another round of violence—and perhaps even civil warfare—in a country that has already seen more war-related deaths than any other on Earth since the Cold War ended. Beyond the humanitarian stakes, Congo is quite literally the crossroads of Africa, the continent’s second largest and third most populous country, bordered by nine other states including Angola, Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda. Much of the continent’s future hinges on what happens here.
The Carter Center, which observed the Congo elections, stated in its Preliminary Post Election Statement: “The level of disorganization prevailing in some polling stations led our observers to give a poor evaluation in 16 percent of cases.” This sense that voters at roughly 15-20% of polling places encountered severe difficulties is widely shared. In addition, there were credible reports of ballot stuffing, voter intimidation, and other electoral violations.
On Tuesday, the President of the Congolese Electoral Commission, Reverend Daniel Mulunda-Nyanga, is expected to announce the interim results of the Presidential election (we won’t know the results of the Parliamentary elections until next year). As expected, the race is between two men, the incumbent President, Joseph Kabila, and longstanding Congolese opposition figure, Etienne Tshisekedi.
Rev. Mulunda is closely tied to President Kabila. This relationship, and Mulunda’s actions and statements during the electoral period, mean that he has little credibility as an impartial actor among Congolese. Many in the international community also doubt his impartiality. Therefore, if Mulunda declares that the interim result shows President Kabila defeating Tshisekedi, his statement is certain to be greeted with great skepticism by many Congolese and others. Furthermore, the finalization of results by the Congolese Supreme Court also is a process that many Congolese deeply mistrust, since the Court is packed with Kabila loyalists and has no record whatsoever of impartiality.
Adding to these serious problems, because of all the mistakes and difficulties around these elections, it will be exceptionally difficult to ascertain the actual winner of a close election. With up to 20% of polling places subject to irregularities, including election violations, with the counting process also filled with irregularities and disorganization, and with little confidence in the neutrality and impartiality of the central Congolese organizations responsible for certifying the elections how can the Congolese ever establish in a reasonable fashion who they chose to be their next President?
Doing so is urgent, since there is widespread fear that the Congo could descend into another round of horrible violence, with massive demonstrations by Tshisekedi’s supporters violently repressed by President Kabila’s security forces – and perhaps hundreds of people massacred in the streets of the Congo. Such violence could lead to further instability, greater violence, and another descent into chaos in a country which has seen millions of unnecessary deaths due to war and chaos over the last fifteen years—but which at the moment is truly ungovernable only in some isolated parts of the east.
That state of affairs could soon change for the worse. The international community, and President Kabila, should bear in mind the stakes. One lesson of 2011 is that people’s movements for change, once begun – and then opposed by government force, tend to lead quickly either to the regime’s downfall or to its international ostracism. Neither prospect should appeal to anyone with any interest in a country so desperate for aid, trade, recovery, and a return to normalcy as is Congo today.
Luckily, there is a process required by Congolese law that the most trusted institution in the Congo, the Catholic Church, as well as the Carter Center and other actors agree on: providing data on election results disaggregated by each polling place. As the Carter Center stated: “The publication of election results by polling station as required by the electoral law (is) the single best means to ensure that the elections reflect the will of the people.” This focus on transparency, long called for by the US Ambassador to the Congo, James Entwistle, and others, is essential to establishing some validity for the election results.
Once these credible results are available and verified, a further problem could arise if the margin between the two candidates is so narrow that fraud and/or disorganization could have affected the outcome. A credible mediation mission, perhaps involving neutral arbiters from other African states, should be put in place to help the Congolese find fair ways to resolve such problems as they arise. The United States must strongly support such efforts.
In 2006, the election came down to two men: President Kabila and Jean-Pierre Bemba. Many Congolese mistrusted the process, yet the Carter Center was able to say the following: “The Carter Center election observation mission to the Democratic Republic of the Congo is confident the results announced by the Independent Electoral Commission (CEI) are consistent with the results obtained in the polling stations. The provision of original tally sheets to candidate witnesses, combined with the publication of results by polling station, introduced a strong measure of transparency that virtually eliminated the possibility of significant fraud after the ballots were counted.”
This process must urgently be replicated as rapidly and transparently as possible to give the people of the Congo reasonable confidence in the results of the election and to prevent yet another Congo catastrophe. The world must also avoid the temptation to paper over election irregularities and tolerate another Kabila term, even if won by hook and by crook, simply because that seems the path of least resistance. Our reading of Congo’s current politics leads us to conclude that such a strategy will not be stabilizing and could prove incendiary. While international leverage is still reinforced by the presence of 19,000 U.N. troops, and while the year 2011 remains the year of political awakenings and hope from Tunisia to Egypt to Libya to Ivory Coast to Burma and beyond, this would be a terrible moment to allow a new form of autocracy to take root in the heart of Africa.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of Tony Gambino and Michael O’Hanlon.
Last week, millions of people turned out in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to vote in Presidential and Parliamentary elections. Unfortunately, because of myriad mistakes in the run-up to the polling, the elections themselves were marred by disorganization, fraud, and violence. And Congolese, as well as the world community, now face a fraught moment.
The electoral dysfunctionality comes on top of Congo’s other huge problems that have put it dead last in the U.N.’s World Development Index. It now risks another round of violence—and perhaps even civil warfare—in a country that has already seen more war-related deaths than any other on Earth since the Cold War ended. Beyond the humanitarian stakes, Congo is quite literally the crossroads of Africa, the continent’s second largest and third most populous country, bordered by nine other states including Angola, Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda. Much of the continent’s future hinges on what happens here.
The Carter Center, which observed the Congo elections, stated in its Preliminary Post Election Statement: “The level of disorganization prevailing in some polling stations led our observers to give a poor evaluation in 16 percent of cases.” This sense that voters at roughly 15-20% of polling places encountered severe difficulties is widely shared. In addition, there were credible reports of ballot stuffing, voter intimidation, and other electoral violations.
On Tuesday, the President of the Congolese Electoral Commission, Reverend Daniel Mulunda-Nyanga, is expected to announce the interim results of the Presidential election (we won’t know the results of the Parliamentary elections until next year). As expected, the race is between two men, the incumbent President, Joseph Kabila, and longstanding Congolese opposition figure, Etienne Tshisekedi.
Rev. Mulunda is closely tied to President Kabila. This relationship, and Mulunda’s actions and statements during the electoral period, mean that he has little credibility as an impartial actor among Congolese. Many in the international community also doubt his impartiality. Therefore, if Mulunda declares that the interim result shows President Kabila defeating Tshisekedi, his statement is certain to be greeted with great skepticism by many Congolese and others. Furthermore, the finalization of results by the Congolese Supreme Court also is a process that many Congolese deeply mistrust, since the Court is packed with Kabila loyalists and has no record whatsoever of impartiality.
Adding to these serious problems, because of all the mistakes and difficulties around these elections, it will be exceptionally difficult to ascertain the actual winner of a close election. With up to 20% of polling places subject to irregularities, including election violations, with the counting process also filled with irregularities and disorganization, and with little confidence in the neutrality and impartiality of the central Congolese organizations responsible for certifying the elections how can the Congolese ever establish in a reasonable fashion who they chose to be their next President?
Doing so is urgent, since there is widespread fear that the Congo could descend into another round of horrible violence, with massive demonstrations by Tshisekedi’s supporters violently repressed by President Kabila’s security forces – and perhaps hundreds of people massacred in the streets of the Congo. Such violence could lead to further instability, greater violence, and another descent into chaos in a country which has seen millions of unnecessary deaths due to war and chaos over the last fifteen years—but which at the moment is truly ungovernable only in some isolated parts of the east.
That state of affairs could soon change for the worse. The international community, and President Kabila, should bear in mind the stakes. One lesson of 2011 is that people’s movements for change, once begun – and then opposed by government force, tend to lead quickly either to the regime’s downfall or to its international ostracism. Neither prospect should appeal to anyone with any interest in a country so desperate for aid, trade, recovery, and a return to normalcy as is Congo today.
Luckily, there is a process required by Congolese law that the most trusted institution in the Congo, the Catholic Church, as well as the Carter Center and other actors agree on: providing data on election results disaggregated by each polling place. As the Carter Center stated: “The publication of election results by polling station as required by the electoral law (is) the single best means to ensure that the elections reflect the will of the people.” This focus on transparency, long called for by the US Ambassador to the Congo, James Entwistle, and others, is essential to establishing some validity for the election results.
Once these credible results are available and verified, a further problem could arise if the margin between the two candidates is so narrow that fraud and/or disorganization could have affected the outcome. A credible mediation mission, perhaps involving neutral arbiters from other African states, should be put in place to help the Congolese find fair ways to resolve such problems as they arise. The United States must strongly support such efforts.
In 2006, the election came down to two men: President Kabila and Jean-Pierre Bemba. Many Congolese mistrusted the process, yet the Carter Center was able to say the following: “The Carter Center election observation mission to the Democratic Republic of the Congo is confident the results announced by the Independent Electoral Commission (CEI) are consistent with the results obtained in the polling stations. The provision of original tally sheets to candidate witnesses, combined with the publication of results by polling station, introduced a strong measure of transparency that virtually eliminated the possibility of significant fraud after the ballots were counted.”
This process must urgently be replicated as rapidly and transparently as possible to give the people of the Congo reasonable confidence in the results of the election and to prevent yet another Congo catastrophe. The world must also avoid the temptation to paper over election irregularities and tolerate another Kabila term, even if won by hook and by crook, simply because that seems the path of least resistance. Our reading of Congo’s current politics leads us to conclude that such a strategy will not be stabilizing and could prove incendiary. While international leverage is still reinforced by the presence of 19,000 U.N. troops, and while the year 2011 remains the year of political awakenings and hope from Tunisia to Egypt to Libya to Ivory Coast to Burma and beyond, this would be a terrible moment to allow a new form of autocracy to take root in the heart of Africa.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of Tony Gambino and Michael O’Hanlon.
__._,_.___