People attend a meeting to support Ivory Coast's incumbent president Laurent Gbagbo on January 15, 2011 in Abidjan.

By Blessing Maduagwu

”War is a continuation of politics by other means’’ ……Karl Von Clausewitz

The world media has given the impression that Cote D’ivoire may be at the edge of the Precipice  if Diplomacy fails. Several African peace envoys have also been dispatched to table the demands of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and United Nations before an impassive and politically isolated Laurent Gbagbo whose recalcitrance and refusal to step down and hand over to the internationally recognized winner of the last November election Allasane Quatara put West Africa and the entire continent on an alert to protect the dignity of democracy, if possible, with the use of force. As the most powerful country in West Africa with immense roles in Peace keeping and enforcement operations in Liberia under the auspices of the Ecowas Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) and whose contribution of forces to the United Nations cannot be impugned, Nigeria has been under tremendous and persistent pressure to lead an attack on its neighbor and ensure the seamless flourish of democracy.

In his Nobel price Speech in Oslo, President Obama emphasized the meaning of just war (jus ad bellum) and the conduct of war (jus in Bello). According to him, the right to war could be justified ‘’if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence”. Under the term ‘’Spectrum of Pressure’’ there should be some options to consider before resorting to the use of force. Diplomacy, which involves high level negotiations, must be fully exhausted before seeking approvals from the United Nations to even begin the use of limited or reasonable force as a prelude to full scale war. At the moment, West African States have not exhausted all diplomatic channels and yet, we could hear the drums of war across the sandy beaches of the west coast of Africa.

Coalition governments in Kenya and Zimbabwe constantly remind us that this is not the first experience with the struggle for leadership in Africa. African leaders have a way of winning elections before going to the polls, staying in power longer than necessary and using state machineries against their opponents. The power and influence of a typical African Head of State or president is so overbearing on the citizens that one begins to wonder why we enslave ourselves with unnecessary lordship rather than leadership. Both Robert Mugabe and Mwai Kibaki lost their elections and yet they are still presidents of their various countries and that’s why it’s becoming unutterably difficult for both ECOWAS and AU to convince Gbagbo to step down. The clear obduracy to hold on to power, even with increasing war rhetorics, political isolations and economic sanctions easily underpins the argument that a war against Gbagbo will definitely contradict the principle of jus ad bellum and exacerbate the poor living conditions of the people of Cote D’ivoire.

The political solution of crises in Zimbabwe and Kenya, where the incumbent presidents lost their elections and then called for negotiations with the winners for a coalition government is now a monstrous Frankenstein that has put African leaders in a precariously dangerous situation. They are the ones that empowered Gbagbo by not standing firm against Mugabe and Kibaki and ensuring that the winners of elections in Zimbabwe and Kenya take the oath of office no matter whose ox is gored. This is the real defense of democracy that can easily justify the use of force which ECOWAS leaders have now realized as the best way forward. The truth is that ECOWAS leaders are utterly out of reason to convince Gbagbo that the political solutions or the coalition governments in Kenya and Zimbabwe where both incumbents lost their elections and refused to hand over, is not right for Cote D’ivoire. This is exactly where Ecowas diplomacy met a gridlock.

From a global perspective, a war with Cote D’ivoire will ultimately affect the structure of inter-regional systems in Africa and question the strength of our belief in Democracy. Emmanuel Kant in his essay ‘’Perpetual Peace’’ (1795) believed that nations can overcome a state of nature and achieve perpetual peace without war. In his views which are strongly upheld by many liberals all over the world, nations can be a federation of like-minded states whose citizens have freedom and enabling environment for peace and free trade. Michael Doyle in his Democratic Peace Theory built on Kant’s philosophy and argued that “Democracies do not go to war with one another’’. Whether, we accept it or not, Cote D’ivoire is now a democratic nation and it will be politically incorrect for democratic nations of West Africa to wage war against a fellow democratic Country.

But even if diplomacy fails and West African nations vote through their various governments to go to war, we’ll need to ascertain our readiness to confront the challenges that war introduces in West Africa. West Africa is a sub-continent that is already at war with poverty, religious and political violence, famine, health care crisis, high mortality rate, corruption, draught and self inflicted recession and now we are considering a war with Cote D’ivoire by building on our success in Liberia as a reasonable justification. Our military is also bereft of adequate knowledge of real conduct of war (jus in Bello) because a strategic war in defense of democracy must be conducted in a way that does not guarantee civilian casualties. A proper conduct of war also involves the use of proper weapons that do not have catastrophic effects like chemical and biological weapons and my fear is that in Africa, anything can happen.

My understanding is that West African leaders are not being properly advised on how to use war rhetorics and get the incumbent president of Cote D’ivoire to step down. As explained ab-initio, pressure, can take different forms to force a Dictator into submission and even with the global debate on the efficacy of sanctions, I strongly opine that it is enough to cripple Gbagbo and confine him into political irrelevance because war simply dignifies him. On the other perspective, it shows the lesson that African children are learning from their leaders, a lesson of dictatorship that is conspicuously predominant in our various families, a lesson that imposes us on top of everything once we see ourselves in position of authorities and that’s why the continent is constantly under the pernicious wrap of dictators without gravitas and conscience that command political wisdom and maturity.

A closer look at war unveils the inescapable notion that it comes with various tactics and strategies which Ecowas countries are utterly ill-prepared for. The ‘’Trinity of War’’ reminds every political scholar that war is a composition of three factors: Violence, chance and politics. In his book “On War’’ Karl Von Clausewitz, who is unimpugnably considered to be the grandfather of military strategies in modern war and whose ideas about war continues to be the bedrock of war studies in various universities and military colleges defined war as a “A continuation of politics by other means’’. In his views, political objectives are the reason for war which could be the means to acquire territories, force peace settlements, preach ideological purposes, protect resources and achieve political ends. War studies strongly confirm some significant problems that Ecowas mayl face should Cote D’ivoire be attacked and these bother on the conditions that come with victory and peace keeping operations. My take in this argument is that war and peace keeping operations in West African countries will only be successful if:

• There is a proper ceasefire
• There is territorial separation between warring parties.

As observed in Somalia, Kosovo, Bosnia Herzegovina, Rwanda, Nigeria, Sudan, Israel/Palestine and even Cote D’ivoire, there were no territorial demarcations after wars and this alone has continued to breed tensions that complicate the struggle for long term peace. This is very likely to play out for the second time between the North and South in Cote D’ivoire that have strategically been divided between two contesting presidents from both sides of the divide. The politics of war and peace with some of these African countries underscore the concept of ceasefire without peace which has indeed brought Cote D’ivoire again to brink of an inconceivable catastrophe.

There is also a critical question of sovereignty which has played out with Ghana’s refusal to contribute its troops or be involved in the internal affairs of Cote D’ivoire. The belief is that Nations should be allowed to solve their internal problems in line with the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and African Charter on Human and Peoples rights (1981). Like most countries with internal problems, it will be politically destructive for Nigeria to embark on any war whilst facing internal and external threats from extremists, as well as growing political tensions between the North and South over the zoning policy of the Peoples Democratic Party. The pressure on the President to spearhead a military attack whilst battling for re-election in April confirms to Gbagbo that the option of war may indeed not be on the table. Most importantly, the Nigerian President Mr. Goodluck Jonathan, who also doubles as the chairman of Ecowas, is a peace loving president that would not want to be involved in the violation of any State’s sovereignty.

Strategically, Cote D’ivoire does not represent any interest that threatens Nigeria’s national interest. The political imbroglio does not put Nigeria at a grave danger of defending its territories by waging war against a neighboring African country, especially this time that warring nations are withdrawing their troops from war zones and taking part in nation building. From a military perspective, a war with Cote D’ivore will be a harbinger of catastrophe in Africa because conflict is pervasive, especially in Africa where corruption and insatiable quest for power have led to many coups and counter coups, wars and genocide. At the moment, West African countries would not skip the devastating effects of this global recession and commit resources on destruction of lives and properties in the same region. The worst is, Ecowas is bedeviled with many infrastructural and fiscal problems that further conflict involving the commitment of resources on a war that lacks a clearly defined economic gain will definitely move the sub-region from the sublime to the ridiculous. In Nigeria, many decision makers want to be re-elected and do not, at this time, crave for any military disaster. There is a risk aversion considering that there is no obvious gain except to feel good and that’s why we must be cautious of the media when advocating war in West Africa. For instance, the media forced the Bush administration in 1992 to get into Somalia and when things turned against the US, the same media became ferociously critical of the administration.

In West Africa, ECOWAS is facing a seriously declining approval rating from many countries within the region. Apart from huge financial problems, ECOWAS is expected to do more whilst at the same time confronted by the reluctance of most countries to contribute immensely to its projects. There is no ready ECOWAS force that is stationed in any country in West Africa and this implies that majority of the peace keepers are going to be volunteer forces. From this perspective, it becomes clear that funding is the key to successful war and peace keeping operation but unfortunately, ECOWAS is horribly underfunded and as such, may find it difficult to pay for drugs, food, salaries and basic supplies.

The next major confrontation will be lack proper training of soldiers for war and peace keeping operations in order to understand the main mission of a military campaign in Cote D’ivoire. Improperly trained soldiers may endanger the Mission and objective of enthroning lasting peace and democracy especially when there is a clash between war, nation building and humanitarian services. The fear of a serious humanitarian crisis will often be confronted with a choice of either saving the lives of fleeing non-combatants caught up in the middle of the crisis  or facing the Ivorian forces defending their sovereignty. In Somalia, Civilians were killed by Pakistani forces who claimed to be threatened by ordinary defenseless people on the street and the fear that this scenario is likely to play out in Cote D’ivoire should not be discountenanced.

As a political scholar, I do not support the use of force as a strategy for conflict resolution in Cote D’ivoire. This is the time to engage in what John Burton calls ‘’The cobweb relationship’’ and collectively cripple Gbagbo with every conceivable sanction. African countries should strongly recognize Allsane Quatara, block Gbagbo’s access to funds, withdraw all Gbagbo Ambassadors, and declare him wanted for crimes against humanity or offer him an interstice to escape and go into exile. These are my reasons for a peaceful solution to the political impasse in Cote D’ivoire.

Blessing Maduagwu writes from New York.