On May 7th, 1990, Tuareg civil populations were targeted for what was to be the first of a series of massacres. Today is the twentieth anniversary of the beginning of this tragedy, which unfolded first in Niger, then both in Niger and Mali, and all lessons have not been drawn from it. Time has come to take stock of the situation and to be reminded that what Tuaregs find difficult to convey, to accept and to listen to, can resurface anytime, with anyone, almost without any reason, and certainly not because of any good reason. Countless examples of this kind abound throughout the world and should remind us that these dreadful events do not only happen to others. This means that we should all behave impeccably, responsibly and most of all with infinite patience in order to persuade neighbours, fellow citizens and observers the world over that, for example, the survival of the Tuaregs and their involvement in the life of the modern States in which they were included are not incompatible. The last two decades have seen the emergence of a Tuareg resistance looking for its way in an environment where law and justice are all too often absent when confronted with arbitrary authorities and the power of the strongest … The Tuaregs live in Central Sahara and at the edge of the Sahel. There are no reliable statistics, but their numbers can be estimated at around 5 millions, with 85 per cent in Mali and Niger. In these countries, each populated with a dozen ethnic groups, Tuaregs make up respectively for 10 per cent and 20 per cent of the population. Thus, on May 7th, 1990, a cycle of repression and destructions started in Niger, then in Mali, which resulted in the death of thousands of Tuaregs. These massacres remain unpunished to this day. The perpetrators have even, in some cases, been simply rewarded with various promotions, as in times of war. This encouraged a real competition and unwillingness to return quickly to peace, so that these promotions could continue, for times are hard for those living on army pay! The international community, notably the NGOs and human rights organisations, adopted a strange attitude towards these events, more because of the banal “double standard” so often applied to situations with “low geopolitical interest”, than because of a true knowledge of what was at stakes. So that people with blood on their hands can pretend to be good democrats while various international actors have chosen to look the other way or even to be a partner in their impunity. The main result of the peace agreements signed in 1992 and 2006 in Mali, and in 1995 in Niger, was that Tuareg armed movements layed down their arms. But the political content of these agreements has obviously not been honoured by the States, notably those articles concerning power sharing between the various communities living in these countries. In 2006, armed confrontations started again between Tuareg movements and the Mali and Niger armies. The deterioration of human rights followed. In Niger dozens of civilians were killed and close to two hundred people were arrested and accused of sympathies with the Tuareg cause. Following a Libyan mediation, several groups have agreed to lay down their arms and to return home. But the underlying political question remains. In Mali, despite the efforts of Algeria and Libya, relations are strained between Bamako and Tuareg groups. These still call for the implementation of the 1992 and 2006 agreements. Survie Touarègue-TEMOUST bemoans that the civil society remains silent in those two countries, and once again call for the political elites to put an end to this wrong and to build up a true culture of peace, which means to put an end to impunity. Survie Touarègue-TEMOUST has often wondered about what to make of the silence of France, the main economic and political “partner” in these two countries. In such a situation, it’s past and present role saddles France with a special responsibility which cannot be shrugged off by adducing diplomatic conventions, in the name of an illusory sovereignty of Mali and Niger. The present context The Tuareg question remains very relevant today and there is a feeling that these two countries (Niger and Mali) are loosing their grip on a situation they really never knew how to manage. How many young Tuaregs get scholarships for advanced education? How many Tuareg leaders share a piece of power in Mali or in Niger? What is the share of the Tuaregs in the civil service, in the army or other state organs? How many hours do the media, radio and television, devote to Tuareg culture? All these questions remain a taboo but they are very present in everyone’s mind and the subject of many conversations, explaining why dissensions are still present between the States and their Tuareg communities. Decentralisation which started in Mali, followed by Niger, allowed Tuareg populations to take up the initiative and start working on local development in their areas. Although it is rarely sustained by the necessary means for its implementation, this decentralisation opens the way for a change in mentalities and advancement in learning how to manage public affairs in a newly competitive political framework. But Tuaregs remain excluded from essential areas of domestic policies and often do not enjoy their fair share of state resources. They very rarely have access to public medias to express their cultural realisations and enjoy a very negligible share of whatever resources the State manages… We know that the current democratic process cannot obviously develop in full in a country where illiteracy reaches record levels and where ethnic considerations are the main component of politics. In the absence of an impartial state and a true feeling of citizenship, it is all the more important that a balance be kept between the various socio-cultural components of these countries. The last decades have shown that the building of a nation cannot be the result of a decree and that it is only when all people adhere to a national purpose which shows respect for their differences that State ensembles can endure, bringing stability to the region. This “unity in diversity” requires a political will of the elites, as well as the support of the international community. The image of the Tuaregs as “outcasts”, which was theirs in the 70s and 80s, is no more, but they still have no political power and no fair access to those circles where decisions are made. This is true both in Niger and in Mali. Past hypocrisies must give way to deliberate and responsible policies allowing for people to live in peace and stability. On the international scene, paternalism must be rapidly replaced by a more balanced, more respectful, type of cooperation to accompany those institutional mutations required if the States are to be consolidated with truly democratic political systems. Nowadays, Tuaregs must rely only on their own dynamism and on their ability to adapt to a world in the process of radical transformation. The latest developments and the manoeuvres of various powers which have an interest in Central Sahara suggest an acceleration of the geopolitical reorganisation process in the region. The Tuaregs cannot afford to let themselves be forgotten again in this new page of history that is written before their own eyes. Geopolitical turmoil in Central Sahara Customary greed from regional and international powers currently merges with war, including psychological war, against “Islamic” groups springing up in many places in the Sahel-Sahara region. In recent years, this interest was illustrated by “war games” supposed to make more visible and render more efficient the “concerted” efforts by some powers toward containing cross-border organised crime and Islamists that have deployed in the region these past few years. These developments must be viewed within the context of a geo-strategic reorganisation initiated by the US to accentuate and widen their influence and “accompany” political evolutions in the region. The region could therefore become a war zone, but what is at stake has nothing to do with the interests of the local people. These populations could in fact be caught between the pincers of the protagonists in a conflict that has nothing to do with their immediate concerns. The Sahel-Sahara region has always been considered a military zone by the States, and it is feared it could become even more so. A kind of consensus is being reached recognising that any true policy on security must involve local populations because they alone can control the terrain and they alone have the capacity to ensure their own safety. It is a fact that Mali or Niger authorities do not have the means to ensure the safety of the local people, and strained relations between these populations and the States do not allow for a structured policy that could contain insecurity and fight banditry and various illegal trades. To be efficient and sustainable, this policy can only be implemented within the framework of a true regionalisation that would allow these populations to take charge of their own development. This would allow for pacified relations between Tuareg regions and their respective states, and could defuse tensions linked to the current heavy centralisation of powers and decisions. The Tuaregs are nowadays determined to fit into the new processes born out of globalisation. The patterns of power inherited from colonial times – based mainly on ethnocentric authorities kept alive by the former colonial power - have also changed as a result of the new global equilibriums and the upheavals resulting from the fall of the Berlin The official international community has always turned a blind eye on human rights violations in this part of the world and bears its fair share of responsibility in the new outbreak of insecurity and the growth of mafia organisations that sometimes use the feelings of unfairness in some Tuaregs to obtain help from them. The events of the last few years showed that great theories on democracy and human rights obviously do not apply to the Tuareg people. Survie Touarègue-Temoust Lyon (France) 7 mai 2010
RSS 2.0