Category Archives: Uncategorized

Malawi’s Presidential Elections Ruling: A Bittersweet Turning Point

Malawi’s Presidential Elections Ruling: A Bittersweet Turning Point

Following months of instability characterised by violent protests and attacks on rights activists, on 3 February 2020, Malawi’s constitutional court annulled the presidential election results from 21 May 2019. Fresh elections will be held within 150 days, according to the court ruling. This new development in Malawi’s electoral destiny signals a progressive new chapter in the country’s attempts to maintain the integrity of its democratic process. Equally, this unprecedented ruling by the constitutional court means that the prospect of further violence and political instability in Malawi is likely to continue for at least 6 months.

The landmark ruling is significant because this is the first election to be legally challenged since Malawi’s independence in 1964. The ruling demonstrated the independence of the country’s judiciary, and more crucially, the judiciary’s ability to flex its legal muscles in a meaningful way. While the judges ruled that the election was not stolen, it said that there was blatant evidence of widespread rigging, which compromised the integrity of the election. This ruling came in favour of opposition parties, despite reports on 22 January 2020 of bribery attempts by a prominent Malawi Banker, Dr Thompson Mpinganjira. The implications of this decision are multi-fold. At a local level this is a win for opposition parties in Malawi and impedes on a culture of widespread impunity. The ruling also stands to change the political landscape of Malawi because the judges have declared the current first-past-the post system is unconstitutional; a gain of more than 50% is required in future elections. This has effectively weakened the power of the incumbent ruling party which had won 38.6% of the vote. Furthermore, this could change the strategic approaches of opposition parties in future elections, where coalitions are more likely.

At a regional level, Malawi’s decision has disrupted the status-quo of mired elections, dogged by broken and ineffective judiciaries. The recent contended results in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe election could have brought a different outcome, if the judiciary had taken similar action to that of Malawi. This ruling also comes at an opportune moment where opposition parties in the southern Africa region in 2019 generally fared badly during their respective elections. A big power shift from liberation movement parties to more contemporary parties had been projected, amid growing dissatisfaction with regional governments, poor service delivery, rising unemployment and inequality. The annulment of Malawi’s 2019 election signals an opportunity for the continued spreading of democracy in the wider southern Africa region, after it appeared as though these gains were backsliding. This hope is important at a time where former liberation movements see their support base eroding, and some governments look to “managed democracies” like Russia or China as a model.

Although the election annulment could have set a precedent of fair judicial arbitration in Malawi, it could prompt more authoritarian regimes to limit the effectiveness of an independent judiciary.

From a security perspective, the judicial ruling may have worked to maintain the integrity of a fair democratic process in Malawi; however, it has done little to assuage the challenge of maintaining public order and political stability amid heightened political tensions. In the months after the 21 May 2019 elections, there was widespread violence which involved looting and destruction of property. Two people, one police officer and one civilian- were reportedly killed during the multitude of anti-government demonstrations. In a report released in December 2019, by Malawi’s Human Rights Commission, it confirmed that at least 8 women were raped and sexually violated during October’s post- election unrest. The incident of the rapes had led to E.U diplomat to Malawi, Sandra Paesen, being ordered to leave the country for protesting the crime.

Despite the constitutional court ruling on 3 February 2020, reports surfaced on 6 February that foreigner’s shops were looted by mobs seeking to take advantage of the political uncertainty. On 13 February 2020, protestors padlocked the offices of the electoral commission in an effort to force the chairwoman of Malawi’s Electoral Commission to quit.

On the same day, the Constitutional Court in Malawi rejected the appeal brought by President Mutharika and Malawi’s Electoral Commission, to suspend its earlier judgement.

Although the judicial intervention in Malawi’s calamitous election saga may have protected the integrity of Malawi’s democratic process, so far this has resulted in more questions than answers, causing further instability in the country. As Malawi attempts to fund and run new presidential elections in under five months, it is likely for political tensions and civil unrest to escalate, which may result in demonstrations and incidences of violence continuing. The constitutional court has not just ordered a rerun of the elections, it has ruled that the country should do away with the first-past-the post system. In theory it is a matter of implementing the ruling, in reality, a consensus is unlikely on the exact interpretation of the decision. How political parties decide to strategically organise themselves and potentially coalesce for the elections, could be another source for instability and possible violence.

The period leading up to this rerun, the unknown outcome, and reaction to the results means that Malawi is likely to experience continued instability for at least the next 6 months.

Belarus: Caught between the East and West

The recent escalation of tensions between Russia and Belarus has created concern that Moscow is gearing up to annex Belarus like it did with Crimea. Russia and Belarus began 2020 without renewing their oil and gas contracts, resulting in Russia stopping its deliveries to the latter. This came after new oil taxes were expected to cost Belarus between $8-12 billion by 2024. While Belarus’s view is that Russia is exerting undue economic pressure on it, Kremlin-controlled media has accused Belarus of exploiting Russian resources. The country asked Russia last year to compensate its losses due to its ‘tax maneuver’. Russia responded by demanding a revitalisation of a 1999 Union State Treaty between the two. Belarus and Russia created this integration format in which they would retain sovereignty, territorial integrity, and constitutions. It provided for the unification or coordination of most economic and social policies, and at some time a united parliament and a constitutional act. Most importantly, they would share one head of state.

The Union State treaty has been at the centre of the dispute. Belarusian President Lukashenko has previously accused Russia of using this oil cut-off to attempt to force Belarus into joining it. “I understand what all those hints mean: You get the oil but you break up your country and join Russia,” he said at a December news conference. In January, he said that he did not wish to be the last president of Belarus. The Belarusian government has responded to the oil cut off by announcing it would reduce its energy dependence. Russian oil could be replaced with Norwegian, Polish, Ukrainian, and even American. Despite these efforts to retain Belarus’ sovereignty several protests against an integration with Russia were held in Belarus throughout January. Talks between the two has been conducted in secret, generating fear that Belarus will give up its sovereignty.

However, Lukashenko has warned that that unless the energy dispute is resolved Moscow could lose its only ally on the western border. If Russia continues pressuring the country, it may follow in Ukraine’s footsteps and start viewing it as a hostile nation. This would be a problem for Russia as it wants to retain Belarus as an ally. According to Yalowitz, former US ambassador to Belarus, Moscow has never forgotten that both Napoleon and the Nazis were able to come through Belarus when invading Russia. The country has long provided discounted oil to Belarus in return for it being a loyal buffer between Russia and Europe. The confrontation between Russia and the West after the 2014 Ukraine conflict started has only aggravated disagreements between Russia and Belarus. The worst-case scenario is one where a military conflict between NATO and Russia is initiated. Situated between the two, Belarusian territory could then become a battleground. In order to prevent this from happening it has taken a neutral stance in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and have encouraged peace talks. However, Moscow has started using economic levers, including the oil issue, to push Belarus to stand by it. If Russia succeeds in ‘taming’ its ally, this could be a potential problem for Western countries.

With Moscow’s history of invading neighbouring Georgia and Ukraine’s strategic Crimean peninsula, it is no wonder that there is speculation that Belarus might be next. Clark and Bugayova, analysts with the Washington D.C Institute for the Study of War, wrote in a May 14, 2019 briefing that the Kremlin “has a strategic interest in consolidating control over Belarus and ensuring the long-term alignment of its government and its people with Russia.” They wrote that Putin likely fears further integration between the West and Belarus, and wants to expand its military basing in the latter country. In addition, Putin could view leadership of the Union State as a possible way of remaining in power after the end of his last presidential term in 2024. However, other experts disagree. While Russia has in recent years performed several land grabs, annexation between Russia and Belarus is less likely. They say that Belarus does not have the same geostrategic appeal for Russia. From a military perspective, annexation would mean that the border between Russia and NATO would be lengthened which could increase Russia’s vulnerability. The move would also most likely provoke a tough response from the West.

In any way, Moscow will most likely continue to try asserting influence over Minsk. Even if full integration remains unlikely, at least for the immediate future, Russia will keep using political and economic means to strengthen its influence over Belarus. Meanwhile it will be difficult for Belarus to turn to the West as long as it remains an authoritarian state. Despite these tensions, Belarus could be the key to solving issues between Russia and the West. It could provide a place for regional security talks for the actors, including Russia, Ukraine, the EU, and the United States. It is uniquely placed to encourage the establishment of regional security cooperation as it is situated between NATO and Russia. Indeed, it has held peace talks to settle the situation in Donbas, which was considered key in the search for ways to restore peace in eastern Ukraine. In this way, Belarus could play an important role in reducing tensions and improving Eastern European security.

French Pension Reform Strikes: Rise of the Far-Left

Since 5 December 2019, French workers have been conducting massive strikes by marching on the streets across France in order to protest the pension reforms announced by French President Emmanuel Macron. The series of strikes, which are still going on today, have been acknowledged as being the largest strikes of the decade in France. On the first day of the strikes, 30 worker unions across the country have carried out strikes. French Interior Ministry stated that between 800,000 and 1.5 million people have joined the strikes across France. It has disrupted the whole country by shutting down public transport services and greatly reduced the number of workers at including staffmembers at hospitals, as well as teachers, firefighters, lawyers, and even police officers. The cause behind the strikes, which are the controversial pension reforms, are actually aimed to simplify the old system. The old pension system divided the pension into 42 different schemes, which is considered very complicated. It is also predicted that the country’s pension deficit could reach 17 billion euros in the near future if the system is not changed. Therefore, President Macron wanted to prevent this situation by creating a unified pension system using an earning point scheme. This plan has been rejected by as many as 61% of the French population, and the workers unions have argued that a unified system will cause inequality between pensions and that workers will receive lower pension funds. At first, the strikes began as a mass movement to oppose this single issue. However, since January 2020, they have seen as being more radical and representing broader issues, campaigning anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism, and anti-fascism rhetoric within each strike.

The rise of new participants within the strikes such as firefighters, lawyers, and students has been seen since January 2020. On 25 January, one of the biggest strikes in January occurred. Workers and students from different organizations marched together waving communist “hammer and sickle”, Antifa, anarchist, and Palestinian flags while singing “Internationale”, which is an anthem for the left-wing movement across the world. They also shouted slogans such as “overthrow capitalism” and “revolution now” during the strikes.  On 28 January, violent clashes occurred between protesters and riot police. The protesters involved in the violent clash mostly consisted of firefighters and anarchist groups. Until the end of January, the series of strikes have been known to involve various left-wing movements from workers unions such as CGT and UNSA to the communist and anarchist groups such as Gauche Revolutionaries and Antifa. The strikes which at first began to oppose a single issue have been interpreted as a symbol of left unity among left revolutionaries across the world. However, it is believed that far-left ideas have become fundamental factors that support the on-going strikes.

CGT, a workers union which is considered to be the main power within the strikes, has been acknowledged for their connection with far-left ideas. Throughout history, CGT, which was founded in 1895, has been known to possess a strong link with far-left revolutionaries, such as the Anarcho-Syndicalism before WW1, and later with the French Communist Party from the end of WW2 until the end of the cold war. Even though CGT is currently not under direct communist influence anymore and fights for a more moderate approach for workers, the anti-capitalist idea is still strongly influencing them. Even several federations and regional branches of CGT are still strongly affiliated with WFTU, which is an international trade federation consisting of Marxists. The director of the Institute of Social History and a specialist in communism, Pierre Rigoulot, stated that the modern CGT is still positioning themselves as forces fighting within class antagonism and seeing their end goal as the abolition of capitalism, which basically adheres to Marx’s thoughts. CGT is also known as having a good relationship with Gauche Revolutionaries, a Trotskyist political party which also has greatly involved within the series of strikes. The series of strikes in France for the past 2 months has indeed portrayed the power of left unity among the people. However, it is also important to consider that this is also the rise of the far-left as a strong factor that unites these people.

Massive anti-government civil unrest is currently occurring in many places all over the world, from countries within the Latin America region such as Bolivia and Chile, as well as in Hong Kong which used to be a very peaceful city. Almost all of these protests are more left-leaning within the political spectrum. The strikes within France can be seen as possessing a big potential of becoming the benchmark of anti-government movement across the world, especially if these strikes achieve success in the future. France’s status as a developed country within the perspective of world citizens is likely to become one of the reasons since most of the countries with the massive anti-government movement now are still considered as developing countries. People are demanding changes within the system and what is occurring in France could influence this demand on a worldwide scale. If the far-left could become one of the fundamental elements within French strikes, it could also happen anywhere. As mentioned before, people are demanding changes, but what kind of changes are yet to be seen.

Insurgency to Continue in Cabo Delgado

Cabo Delgado, Mozambique’s northernmost province, is in the midst of a slow-growing Islamist insurgency with the districts of Mocimboa de Praia, Palma, Montepuez and Macomia most affected. The unrest looks set to continue into the new year and beyond.  In the close of the previous year a reported 65,000 people were displaced and over 600 people are estimated to have been killed as a result of the spreading violence which began in October 2017.  The group’s modus operandi so far has been fairly unsophisticated, although in recent months this has expanded from attacks mainly targeting civilians with remote village raids, burning down of homes and businesses, killing residents with machetes and occasionally firearms; to abductions, beheadings, raiding of police stations, ambushes along major roads and increased violent clashes with government defences forces and contracted mercenary groups. While the month-to-month pace of attacks has been inconsistent, there has been a general increase in violence over the past year, particularly in the months leading up to the close of the year, suggesting a growing confidence among the militants. The reported beheading of 10 members of Russia’s Wagner mercenary group on 25 Nov 2019 is an example of the shadowy insurgency’s increasing operational boldness.

Still at an early infancy, the exact origins or who the insurgents are is unknown. Despite their increased activity, the motives, ideology and objectives of the militants remain unclear, largely due to a lack of public statements from the group, however it is likely that the group is looking to create a new social order that could afford them greater economic and political power. Although there are no formal links with local, regional or international extremist networks, including Somalian regional terror group Al-Shabaab, the insurgents are known locally as ‘Al-Shabaab’. There have been reports that the Islamic State (IS) is said to be operating in Northern Mozambique under the umbrella of its so-called Central Africa Province Branch which it declared in April 2019, however there has been no verified collaboration or merger between the two groups. The insurgent group has been referred to by several other names including, ‘Ahlu Sunna Wa-Jamma’ (ASWJ). Mozambique’s ‘Al-Shabaab’ or ASWJ, is the radical activist sect that split off from a sub-organisation within the Islamic Council of Mozambique, called “Ansaru-Sunna” formed in the 2000’s. The insurgency is most likely rooted in the historically unequal distribution of political and economic power among the predominant ethnic groups in the province. Although Cabo Delgado is wealthy in natural resources such as gas, oil and minerals, it ranked among Mozambique’s poorest provinces.

ASWJ may not have any established motives or objectives, however their most recent activities indicate that further violence can be expected at least in the Cabo Delgado province over the next 6 months. In light of the wider instability that is affecting Mozambique, from its environmental crisis to the continued unrest being propagated by the opposition Renamo’s break away dissident faction, ASWJ is likely to seek to take advantage of, and build on its own momentum it has created in Cabo Delgado in recent months. The ‘strategic retreat’ which it reportedly forced the Russian mercenary Wagner group to take on 25 November 2019 was a symbolic victory that signalled the insurgent group’s capability of diversifying their modus operandi and taking on other targets that are not limited to civilians or remote villages. On 5 December 2019, further attacks were launched on the country’s defence and security forces where at least 18 people died and on 19 December 2019 it was reported that ASWJ had been raiding police property in order to enable them carry out their attacks in Cabo Delgado. The operational tactics may have remained fairly unsophisticated, however ASWJ has become more brazen with their attacks while the government has been very slow in combating this, and there are a number of factors for this. The first is that the government’s party line was an initial denial of an Islamic insurgency in favour of holding onto the belief that opposition Renamo’s break away militant faction ‘Military Junta’ was responsible for the attacks. This has not been helped by the fact that threats of violence by Military Junta have been issued and on 28 December 2019 Military Junta took responsibility for the attacks on vehicles travelling through the centre of the country, which resulted in 10 deaths. In response the government deployed army escorts to address that issue. President Nyusi on 19 December 2019, made a pledge to end the insurgent attacks, however since the insurgent attacks began in October 2017 the primary use of the military  as a means to weaken the militants has proven to have little impact on the group’s capabilities.  Without a clear government strategy aimed at addressing the insurgency in Cabo Delgado, the violence is likely to continue and potentially escalate if the group is not contained in its infancy. Currently ASWJ does not appear to be competing with a rival armed group for dominance in Cabo Delgado, while on the other hand, the government is dividing its defence resources between dealing with the armed groups in Central Mozambique as well as in Cabo Delgado, this is another factor that is likely see the violence continue as the insurgency takes advantage of the opportunity. The north, like other parts of Mozambique, is still recovering from the devastation caused by Cyclone Kenneth, added to this that Mozambique is within the region of Southern Africa that is facing severe drought and is likely to enable ASWJ to enact strategic violence in the Cabo Delgado province. The province’s long history of marginalization by the state is not likely to be addressed in under 6 months and the lack of accessibility to the region gives the militants in Cabo Delgado a strategic advantage for the foreseeable future.

NATO’s Eastern Flank

Throughout December 2019 there has been some new military developments in Eastern Europe. NATO has increased its presence in the region and Russia has announced that it is the first country to possess hypersonic weapons. There is not much trust between the two, especially as both seek to build more military power to deter the other. While one excuses their actions as defensive, the other considers them aggressive – and respond with what they again consider as defensive measures. Thus, the cycle continues.

Eastern Europe has become the centre of this security dilemma as it is situated between the two. Estonian defence minister Jüri Luik said that Russia’s actions showed it was a serious security threat. Lithuanian defence minister Raimundas Karoblis added that “Russia is the only external existential threat” they have. As such several countries in the region clearly consider Russia the major security concern. Consequently, NATO has sought to strengthen its Eastern flank throughout December. Its efforts in Eastern Europe have included deploying rapid response forces, embedding units under the Baltic states’ forces command, building up equipment arsenals, and conducting increasingly complex exercises. UK troops were sent to Estonia and German troops to Lithuania to reassure their allies on the eastern side of NATO. In addition, Romania’s president said that 120 air defence troops would be sent to Poland to support NATO’s presence there.

This positioning of military forces in Eastern Europe was considered necessary to deter the alleged increased Russian aggression. Defence leaders have said that the deployment of the enhanced forward presence battalions in the Baltics have significantly reduced the risk of military conflict in the region. Looking at the future, using American troops to bolster defence against Russia remains a top priority to strengthen security in Eastern Europe. In addition, strengthening the Baltic states’ air defence has been cited as a priority when considering a situation where they would be faced with Russia’s capability. Defence minister Luik said that NATO is the only organisation that can deter the Russian aggression against its neighbours.

Russia fear the prospect of its neighbours joining NATO as this would leave it surrounded by pro-Western states. Valášek, a researcher focusing on security and defence, said that “Moscow’s general strategy has been to deter what it perceives as challenges to its political order and territory(…) and dominate its immediate neighbourhood…”. The tensions between the two have only increased as Russia revealed that its hypersonic weapon had now become operational. In what was either a move for increased transparency or a show of power, Russia recently demonstrated the weapon for American inspectors. Russia claimed that the Avangard is capable of travelling at 27 times the speed of sound and dodge missile defence systems that tries to block it. Its difference from a regular missile warhead is that the latter follow a predictable path after separation while the Avangard can make maneuvers, thus making it much more difficult to stop.

The US and Russia has been working on these types of weapons for years. The Russian military is the first one to own this new class of nuclear weapon, meaning other militaries can currently not defend themselves against it. As such defence strategies against hypersonic weapons will likely be high on Western countries’ agenda. US officials have already discussed putting sensors in space to ensure fast detection of such weapons. While Western countries are most likely not far from developing these weapons themselves, Russia is currently pulling ahead in the global arms race – and that will no doubt trouble NATO going into 2020.

This development has been viewed by many as a concerning sign for the future of warfare. The concern that an arms race has begun between Russia and the US only rose when the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty between Russia and the US broke down earlier in 2019. The relationship between the two has been particularly strained since 2014. The annexation of Crimea and Russia’s backing of separatists in Ukraine means that all civilian and military cooperation between Russia and NATO are suspended. The alliance has a difficult task as it must encourage dialogue with Russia in order to reduce these tensions while also backing its neighbours, like Ukraine. NATO stated their committal to remain open to dialogue and to create a constructive relationship with Russia in the December 4 Declaration by the Heads of State participating in a NATO Leaders Meeting in London. However, according to NATO this can only happen when Russia’s actions make it possible.

“Russia’s aggressive actions constitute a threat to Euro-Atlantic security”, the Declaration said. While the Cold War and the Soviet Union is a long time ago the tensions between the West and Russia continues to be high. It is difficult to see how the security dilemma in Eastern Europe can be solved as this would require agreements on issues such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict, arms control, and sanctions. For the moment these appear insolvable.