Ivory Coast

[Spiffor]

The situation in Ivory Coast is very cloudy, so I thought I'd do some research to know more precisely what happens there.
Here is the first part of my findings :

Some data on Ivory Coast

(according to Le Monde Diplomatique, and Lonely Planet)

Short History of Ivory Coast :

1960 : Independance of Ivory Coast from France. Both countries keep strong ties together. Félix Houphouët-Boingy is president.
1960-1980 : highest growth rates in all western Africa, supported by the exports of cacao and coffee. People talk about an "Ivorian economic miracle"
1980 : hard Crisis for the economy, as prices for these raw materials fall.
1990 : The restriction policy provokes demonstrations. For the first time, several parties may present candidates in the elections.
1993 : Death of Félix Houphouët-Boigny. He is replaced by Henri Konan-Bédié.
1999 : General Robert Gueï takes the power after a coup.
2000 : The socialist Laurent Gbagbo claims to win the disputed election against Gueï and Konan-Bédié.
18-19 Sept 2002 : Beginning of the insurrection from a part of the military. Robert Gueï dies mysteriously 20th Sept.


Ivory Coast is a multiethnic State, whose borders have been drawn independantly to etnical boundaries during the French decolonization (independance in 1960)


All Ivorian leaders have favored their ethnic group. Houphouët-Boigny (leading from 1960 to 1993) favored the Baoulé, and promoted his home village Yamoussoukro to the rank of political capitol. Others presidents have favored their own ethnical group. Current President Laurent Gbagbo does nothing else, and gives influential posts to those of his ethnics, in the Southwest.

All leaders and ruling elites come from the south of Ivory Coast. The construction of national identity in IC lies on both big ethnical groups of the South, et the expanse of northern ethnical groups.
Northern people are often assimilated with foreigners (1 mio foreigners in IC), and some didn't get the Ivorian nationality despite their constitutional right to have it.
This creates a balance of power in favor of the South, but the North is greatly alienated.
Also, please notice the religious situation : the South is catholic, while the north is muslim. There has always been much funding from the State towards the catholic Church -the biggest example being the luxurious basilica of Yamoussoukro-, while no funding has been sent to the Muslims.

All in all, this leads to an explosive ethnical situation. Violences have already striked during Houphouët-Boigny's reign, with several thousands deaths. The current conflict can be interpreted along the lines of ethnical conflict, or maybe not.

[GePap]

While the rebels were wrong to take up arms intead of trying to work things out peacefully, form all i have heard, President Gbagbo and his supporters are being very intransigent about the peace deal the French pushed through: the only thing keeping the rebels from taking the capital (forgot how to spell it) are the French forces. It is also sad to see what was once a sucessful state torn apart by ehtnocentric politics.

[Carver]

Well, on one hand, Gbagbo needs to be more inclusive with northern Muslims and immigrants (especially 2nd generation). But on the other hand, I don't think the rebel soldiers should be rewarded for taking up arms.

We should remember what immeadiately promted the coup attempt in 2002 was the discharging of these 1000-2000 soldiers. I think the main reason they rebelled was they didn't want to loose their jobs; and then they took up the cuase of northerm marginalization later to gain more support.

Gbagbo has a mandate to rule; the only controversial thing about the 2000 election was the exclusion of a particular northern leader. But Gbagbo clearly won (although most votes for him were really votes against Guei).

The ideal would be if the government army were strong enough to crush the rebels and move on, but they aren't. So Gbagbo probably needs to get on with the peace deal.

[Spiffor]

Here are more cloudy memories of what happened, and reconstitution from various sources.

The French intervention in Ivory Coast

French troops are present in Ivory Coast as per the defense agreement between both countries. At first, the French thought about not intervening, since it was believed in the first days that Gbagbo would have the situation under control.
But the situation went out of hand, and the Rebels controlled Bouaké, 2nd city in the country. The French military, as well as American troops, went to evacuate foreign citizens in Bouaké.
Since then, France has spread its military on a East-West line, de facto dividing the country in two. The French military prevents both sides (loyalists and rebels) to fight each other. However, at the beginning of the conflict, France provided logistical help to Gbagbo's troops, who then became approx. on par with the Rebels.

Sénégal has brokered a cease-fire in November IIRC, and an intenrational force from nearby countries (incl. Nigeria) came to complete the French buffer.

Under the pressure of France's foreign minister Dominique de Villepin, all parties of the conflict have been invited in Paris for peace talks. These leaders agreed reluctantly to what is called the "Marcoussis agreements".
Basically, the Marcoussis agreements call for the nomination of a Prime minister and a union government, which features rebels as well as loyalists, under the control of international (i.e French and West African) observers. This has met major critics in the Ivorian population on both sides, including the wife of Laurent Gbagbo. He changed his stance to accept the "spirit" of the Marcoussis agreement, but not the "letter"

Today, the status quo between north and south is about the same as during the negociations of Marcoussis, except that a Prime minister has now been nominated. But the situation is degrading quickly in the south, with death squadrons killing in the name of Gbagbo. Almost no information from the north is heard of here in France.

[Spiffor]

Ah, and the situation one month ago (6 Jan. 2003) according to the French Foreign Ministry

[GePap]

Let me guess, FANCI are the Armed forces of the Republic of the Ivory Coast? (aka, the army?)?

Its good to see the gove still controls the coffee and the Cocoa: we can't lose that Chocolate Mocca!

[DuncanK]

It seems to me that the French favor the Gbagbo since they are Catholic, even though they try to appear neutral. And I thought you said the Catholics are in greater numbers. So my question is, is anyone supporting the rebels? How do they seem to be winning this fight?

[Ted Striker]

Frenchie says, "All your Cacao Belong to Us."

[GePap]

War for Oil? (no, i don't think its for oil)
or War for Chocolate? (no, its not about chocolate)

The French have the right priorities.

[Spiffor]

Ge :
FANCI, I guess it means Forces Armées Nationales de Côte d'Ivoire (or something like that), aka the army. After all, the symbol is the Ivorian flag, and is located only southern of the French / Panafrican buffer.

DuncanK :
I've yet to understand the French position. France favored Gbagbo at the beginning, but not as clearly as former French military interventions in Africa (20 years ago, we'd just have sent the legion to crush the rebels).
Since the Marcoussis agreements, France seems to look for a balanced solution between the rebellion and the loyalists. It appears (however this information can be completely false and manipulated) that Gbagbo has very much support in the south, and the rebels very much support in the north.

I guess France is looking for an exit from the crisis without an all out war, to avoid a long-lasting destabilization of this region. Such a peaceful solution would also be very good for the carreer of Dominique de Villepin.

The rebels have the military edge because they are mostly former troops from the Ivorian army. Actually, General Robert Gueï hired them when he was in power (1999-2000), and Gbagbo has tried to topple them from being dominant in the military.

[Carver]

Awesome map Spiff, I should have been going to the French FM this whole time.

The French attitude towards military intervention in Africa has changed considerably from a few decades ago. Their most blatant intervention was probably in Gabon in 1967 when the Gabonese army overthrew the government because of corruption and the French rolled in and restored the old government. Since then the Gabonese army has been kepy to 1500 men to prevent furhter coups.

France is now more reluctant to persue overt intervention. France was slow to deploy significant numbers of troops to central Ivory Coast but the large number of French citizens in the country and the amount of French investment obviously became a factor.

[Spiffor]

Thanks Carver. I was also surprised by the quality of the French FM's web.

I think another factor in the changes in French African policy is the complete failure of Rwanda intervention : basically, the French had supported the Hutu majority for a long time there, and sold most weapons the Rwandans used to genocide.
The French military was unable to stop the slaughter, and was unable to get peace talks whatsoever. In the end, only the strongest of the 2 rwandans ethnical groups prevailed, after a huge bloodshed.
France tries to avoid making such useless interventions now. I guess a significant part of the French policy in Ivory Coast has to do with (retoring) prestige.

[Odin]

I think there needs to be a UN summit of african ethnic groups to create national borders based on ethnicity; this stuff in Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Sudan, and other countries is getting sickening. Nigeria's revolutionary leader warned us,"Nigeria isn't a nation, it is a mere geographical expression."

[Kontiki]

That's a huge problem though and few, if any, people have any idea how to overcome it. True, the borders marked out during colonial times (which spilled over into independence) are completely arbitrary with regards to ethnicities and traditional tribal areas, but even if you managed to remake the map, how well would it really work? First off, there's already a large number of countries on the continent, many of which are not really viable as fully functioning countries in the modern world - imagine if that number doubled or tripled, as ethno-boundaries would entail. Second, even if the various ethnic groups managed to get their own countries, I fail to see how much of the violence would be curtailed. You'd still have different groups living right next to each other that hated each other. While it might address the issue intra-state conflict caused by one cultural/tribal group lording its power over another, it seems that what would replace it would be a large number of inter-state conflicts.

I wish I could come up with a viable solution to these types of problems, but thus far I can't think of one.

[Dinner]

Spiffor: Aren't many of the rebels from new post independence immigraint groups?