Advertisements
"France - which was briefly and some would say disastrously involved in Rwanda in 1994 - is believed to be the country most likely to step in. In the House of Commons this week, Tony Blair supported the idea of such a force and said Britain was considering what contribution it might make. Much the same goes for other EU member states.
So far, so good? Not really. For a start, Congo is as large as western Europe. Its intractable problems go back years, with Ituri province being but the latest troublespot. An international force of several thousand soldiers, even armed with a robust UN mandate, will be unable to do much more than secure the immediate area, and rescue the UN observer mission known as Monuc.
Foreign troops may stop the fighting between the Hema and Lendu ethnic militias. But then what? They may find that they are stuck, unable to leave without precipitating a return to chaos.
To avoid that scenario, a new, concerted, presumably western-assisted or western-led drive on both political and diplomatic fronts will be required to achieve some sort of lasting internal as well as regional settlement.
An essential prerequisite for that is a programme of generous humanitarian and then reconstruction aid and investment. Who is going to provide it? And for how long? Britain's international development secretary, Clare Short, was until recently gamely wrestling with these issues, with some results. But she has lost her job and it is unclear whether her successor, Baroness Amos, will be as closely engaged."
Posted by David Weman at May 23, 2003 06:31 PM