Issues as UN peacekeeping troops exit Mali amid protest

Whether it is for good or not, the decade-long stabilisation efforts of the United Nations (UN) Peacekeeping Mission in Mali comes to an end following a request by Mali’s military junta for the withdrawal of troops ‘without delay.’ The United Nations Security Council, on June 30, unanimously voted in favour of Mali’s request to leave, […]

Whether it is for good or not, the decade-long stabilisation efforts of the United Nations (UN) Peacekeeping Mission in Mali comes to an end following a request by Mali’s military junta for the withdrawal of troops ‘without delay.’

The United Nations Security Council, on June 30, unanimously voted in favour of Mali’s request to leave, having considered a six-month drawdown plan for withdrawal, which begins in July.

The Multidimensional Integrated Stabilisation Mission (MINUSMA), which is considered the most expensive UN mission with an annual budget of $1.2billion was establish in April 2013, with a mandate to ensure security, stabilisation and protection of civilians, support national political dialogue and reconciliation and assist the reestablishment of state authority, rebuild the security sector, promote and protect human rights in Mali.

But after 10 years, Malians are dissatisfied with the efforts of the UN peacekeeping mission as insurgents continue to attack civilians, taking over territories.

• Govs Versus Godfathers: All Eyes On Kano, Rivers, Delta, Sokoto
• Mother of 8 delivers triplets, gets Kebbi gov’s wife’s support

Mali’s foreign affairs minister, Abdoulaye Diop, told the 15-member UN Security Council that “MINUSMA seems to have become a part of the problem in fuelling inter-community tensions.

“This situation is begetting mistrust among the Malian population and causing a crisis of confidence between Malian authorities and MINUSMA,” he said.

Mali’s military junta has been at loggerheads with the UN mission over its scrutiny of the country’s counter insurgency efforts as encapsulated in a UN report that criticise human rights abuses allegedly perpetrated by Mali’s armed forces and its partners.

The Assimi Goita-led transitional government considers UN’s allegations of sexual violence, looting and summary execution as a smear campaign to discredit the legitimacy of the armed forces intervention.

For the Malian government, severing ties with France is not enough to get rid of interference in its internal affairs as the former colonialist could continue to meddle through MINUSMA, being a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto powers.

Analysts have raised some concerns about the impact of the withdrawal of the UN Peacekeeping Mission in Mali on the stabilisation of the country, especially as it approaches transition to a constitutional government in the first quota of 2024.

Can the Malian government pull through? With over 15,000 uniformed personnel comprising contingent troops, experts on mission and staff officers, the withdrawal of MINUSMA will no doubt create a vacuum that could only be filled by the very insurgents the military junta aims to eliminate. While MINUSMA’s role may not have been confrontational, there’s a feeling that their presence on the streets deter attacks on the civilian population.

Thanks to the recent military cooperation between Mali and Russia, the latest global fire power ranking of the most powerful armies in the world ranks the Malian armed forces among the top 3 in West African military power alongside Nigeria and Ghana.

But with an area size of 1,241,238 km2 and an estimated population of 21.9 million people, it remains to be seen how the 21,000 sized armed force could pull off the challenges before it.

What will be the fate of internally displaced persons? Being a Multidimensional Integrated Stabilisation Mission, with a mandate to secure, stabilise and protect civilians, the mission recognizes and supports the supply of relief to displaced people.

To this end, the mission’s air assets – 63 aircraft, including 16 planes as at 2022 – have played a crucial role in maintaining connections between the capital and the northern regions.

Speaking on Trust TVs Africa Update, a former UN expert on mission, Wg. Cdr. Musa Salmanu (retd) said, “A large portion of the country is ungovernable and the Malian troops have not established their presence and stronghold in those parts of the country, especially in the northern part of the country. So there is going to be a vacuum whereby relief and other assistance cannot get to civilians, in this instance, a lot of civilians are going to suffer.”

Who monitors human rights abuses? The allegation of summary killings and human rights abuse in Moura, an area that was controlled by terrorists and the denial of the UN mission access to the area for investigation, is a major cause for the departure of MINUSMA from Mali. While the Malian government denies any wrong doing in Moura, observers are concerned about who will ensure the protection of human rights in the conflict zone.

Musa Salmanu said, “Protection of civilians is always a major component of every government,” either from its own forces or other adversary forces like the insurgents and other terrorist organisations.

“The Malian government has to be engaged because it is the government in place. Whether it is democratic or not, it has to be engaged in a way that ensures it carries out its responsibility.

“The international community has a responsibility in this instance to ensure that it assists the Malian government in discharging that responsibility, and if it fails, it can intervene,” Musa said.

But the question of how to hold the Malian armed forces to account begs for an answer as the only mechanism to do so has been technically dismantled.  This remains a big question asked, even in the context of the role of the UN Peacekeeping Mission in the Russia-Ukraine war.

What happens to the gains so far achieved? As the lead mediator in the peace deal brokered in 2015 between the Malian government and the coordination of Azawad Movements (the main coalition of former rebel groups) and the Platform of Algiers (a conglomerate of pro-government groups), there are concerns that the exit of MINUSMA could weaken the implementation of some of the agreements entered into at the time.

Observers fear that coupled with the criticism of some provisions in the new drafted constitution by signatories to the Algiers agreement, there could be resumption of hostilities, which would further exacerbate the stabilisation efforts in Mali.

Although the Malian authorities publicly maintain their commitment to the process, they have also said they want to revisit its terms.

Is the risk of isolation real? With the withdrawal of MINUSMA, Mali hopes to fill the void in collaboration with Russia, but as Russia’s war with Ukraine, and by extension the West persists, how efficient is this strategy?

Because the insurgency in Mali has a regional dimension as several countries are battling terrorism, it remains to be seen how Mali would engage with its neighbours in the aftermath of the MINUSMA exit.  For instance, among the top 10 contributors of troops to MINUSMA are eight African countries, some of whom are Mali’s next-door neighbours, such as Burkina Faso, Guinea, Cote d’IVoire.

Although Mali remains a member of the United Nations, it is unclear how this decision will impact on its international relations going forward.

Analyst said that while resentment and hostility are usually towards UN forces, it may not extend to other UN officials who engage in other interventions, such as the UN food programme, the UNDP and others.

However, despite all the possible negative impacts of the decision to end the UN Peace Keeping Mission on the stability of Mali, why would the transitional government be willing to damn it all?

What’s behind anti-UN protests in Francophone countries?

Until the decision to exit Mali, the United Nations had 12 peacekeeping operations across the world, six of which were in Africa: Sudan, South Sudan, Morocco, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Central Africa Republic and Mali.

But with the exit of the peacekeeping mission in Mali and growing resentment against UN troops among the population in the DRC, one is tempted to ask, what is the future of UN Peacekeeping mission on the African continent?

In the past couple of years, protesters in Mali, Democratic Republic of Congo and Central Africa Republic marched the streets, calling for an end to UN peacekeeping missions, while canvasing for military collaboration with Russia.

Some experts argue that there’s a need to review the rules of engagement of UN peacekeeping missions.

There are three cardinal principles of peacekeeping: Consent of parties, non-partiality and non-use of force. However, there’s a thin line between keeping the peace and enforcing peace. UN troops are sometimes perceived as lacking the commitment to end conflict as the host may sometimes prefer peacekeeping forces to take sides.

The resentment against UN peacekeeping missions in Francophone countries is said to be borne out of the failure of UN troops to protect civilians. But with the limitations posed by their rules of engagement, how effectively can the UN troops perform this function?

Geopolitics: With Africa as the battle ground for the ongoing shifting world order, rivalry between world powers – France, US, Russia, China is finding expression at the UN Security Council with visible impact on the African continent. For instance, in their demonstration of rejection for France and UN, protesters in the three Francophone countries wave Russian flags in support of military cooperation while burning French flags and attacking UN offices.

Disinformation: The International Peace Institute in November 2022 attributed anti-UN sentiments to the barrage of disinformation campaign targeted at UN peacekeeping operations.

According to the IPI, this includes false allegations that UN peacekeepers are trafficking weapons to armed groups, supporting terrorists, and exploiting natural resources.

The IPI report indicates that the lack of information in the face of uncertainty makes people more likely to turn to untrustworthy sources.

Way forward

To secure the future of UN peacekeeping missions, the Institute for Security Studies suggests a review of UN peacekeeping operations as traditional forms of prevention, management and resolution has failed to accommodate emerging threats to global peace.

In the light of the impact of geopolitics on conflict resolution in Africa, it is time to revisit the membership of the United Nations Security Council to allow Africa be on the table of decision making as permanent member in line with calls by several African leaders.

Peacekeeping missions must also be people-centric to achieve success as consent is a critical component to the legitimacy of any peace mission.