THE OBJECTIF

The International community has strongly condemned the coup take over in Guinea by the military after the dead of Guinean strong man Lansane Conte who remained in power as President for more than 2 decades.  The condemnation of the coup was immediate with the African Union, ECOWAS and other nations calling it unacceptable.  At odds with this condemnation is the wide spread support for the coup among the Guinean People. Guineans flogged to the streets of the capital city Conakry in jubilation.

Guinea is a small former French colony in West Africa. She gained her independence in 1958 and has since been ruled by only two presidents.  President Ahmed Sekou Toure ran the country as his personal restaurant from 1958 until his dead in 1984. After his dead, an interim administration led by Prime Minister Louis Lansana Beavogui took over the running of government.  Beavogui’s rule was brief, however, and a military junta headed by Lansana Conte and Diarra Troare seized power on April 3, 1984 in a bloodless coup.  Conté became President with Traore as Prime Minister. Conté condemned human right abuses in the previous regime, but strangely in 2007 he violently quelled down dissent against his rule. More than a 100 protesters were shot dead by police and troops.  Conte had since ruled Guinea until his dead on December 23, 2008.  According to Guinea’s Constitution, the President of the National Assemble Aboubacar Sompare should take over as interim head of state and hold presidential elections within 60 days.

In flagrant disrespect of Guinean constitution and like a repeat of history in this poor former French colony, a military junta led by Capt Camara, a junior army officer took over power in a coup. The current junta like their predecessor has set up a 32 member council promising to restore democracy and rid the country of corruption.  The junta has postponed having elections within 60 days to 2 years, but says it has no ulterior motives.

Guinea is the world’s biggest exporter of aluminum ore bauxite, but most of the revenue from ore exploitation goes to fill the private accounts of state representatives while the majority of Guinean languishes in abject poverty. While poverty ravages communities, ministers and other government officials continue to live in great affluence.

The paradox of democracy shows it head here once more. The international community is stressing the immediate resumption to civilian rule and the reinstatement of constitutionality. Contrarily, Poor Guineans have taken to the streets in ecstasy and praising the coup leaders to have momentarily taken them out of the military-turn-civilian rule that kept them captives for decades.  Should a military coup publicly supported by the masses be upheld or considered unconstitutional?

In a related event, victory theories about the run-up to the Iraq war were supported by illusions that some Iraqi military general could topple the Saddam regime, thus shortening the war. Some of those who currently condemn this military takeover previously support the delusional Iraq theories.  There is no doubt about the horrendous deeds of Sadam. There has been some support to a military action in Zimbabwe even by some religious leaders. These comparisons might seem a little displaced or extreme, but they nonetheless mirror the similarities. Where does one draw a line between a military and no military takeover for two governments that have ransacked public funds? Many diplomats say the military take over is completely objectionable, but is a coup democratically approved if people run to the streets in support of it? The Guinean coup appears to have a widespread support in Guinea although it does not bear the marks of a democratically legitimate approbation.

Guineans seem to be expressing their dejection and outright rejection of the Guinean leadership. It should be recalled that the individuals constitutionally destined to form an interim government are the same ones who served actively as the Guinean economy lumbered with corruption and mismanagement. At their watch, the citizens were shot as they protested against poor living conditions, making it all the more difficult for Guineans to have any trust in them.

However, coups bring more uncertainty and uncertainty is too fragile to cling too. The junta is making promises, but it is too early to judge whether it will deliver on those promises. Guineans may be excited, but they are unfortunately deprived of any means to legally hold the junta responsible for any poor actions either.

Guinea still has a long way to go. For the Guineans, their joy may be in stark contrast with international disapproval of the coup, but they hope that everything works for the best. The sudden rush by Guineans to the streets seems to express a sense of hope that their long awaited wish has finally come to fruition. Their journey has been too long and they can barely endure anymore.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS