Burundi at crossroads

Prof said:

Good observation mr. Malcom Lumumba, though your analysis lacks legal back-up and precedence to support your arguments...! I don't want to believe what i see especially from respected scholars in this platform and their argument/opinion about Burundi and AU interventions in de javu. All in all, i can see a growing trend of people lodging their submission based on their emotions rather than facts.....and that's bad!! with that preamble above, let us come to the Business...

1. Keep reminded that, AU has mandate to intervene on the ongoing situation in Burundi and this is drawn from its commitments to guarantee peace, security and tranquility in the Region. Burundi, being the signatory of AU treaty is binded by Article 4(J) of the treaty which require the AU to intervene in case of war crime or crime against humanity...the article provides that, AU shall have the right of the Union to intervene in a Member State pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity....Also, in sub-article K, stipulates that, the right of Member States to request Intervention from the Union in order to restore peace and security, in accordance with Article 4(j) of the Constitutive Act...
   From that perspective, we now see the justification of AU of sending peace keepers in Burundi and it is all about the agreement forming AU of which Burundi adhered to implement and respect........And the question is, don't they remember about signing the treaty? However, concerning peace and tranquility in Burundi is also the obligation of EA community, leave alone the AU. for instance, article 5(3)(F) of the East African treaty provides for common objectives of which Burundi among 5 member states agreed to. for example, the article read that; Community shall ensure the promotion of peace, security, and stability within, and good neighbourliness among, the Partner States...., thus, its not only AU duty to deploy peace keepers or stabilizing peace in Burundi...BUT it starts with EAC...
   
   
2. what is happening in Burundi is another disrespect of democracy and Crime against humanity...and AU have obligation to intervene by either having permission or without permission and its all legal....! Remember the Slobodan Milošević of former yugoslavia...He was terrorizing his own people, just like what Nkurunziza does...But NATO said enough is enough, they redeemed people of KOSOVO and hope it will never be the same again....!However, UN remain with One role of responsibility to protect and prevention of genocide.(Resolution adopted by the General Assembly in 2005) where it was agreed that UN shall protect and prevent genocide and work to install sustainable democracy in a member state. Thus, through this interpretation, AU has impliedly right to intervene in Burundi even without consultation from UN security council..
3. Tanzania not willing to intervene/help Burundi....The answers vary depending on who has to make a point...! BUT i guess there is no clear and evident answer beyond reasonable doubt as to why TZ is not helping Burundi...and not suprised to hear that, Burundi and Tanzania were sidelined and isolated by Nyangau (cow) and in retaliation, Burundi seems loyal and a big brother to Tanzania....Once again this is a blasphemy and only a lame can buy it....!!
   
   Way forward
   without prejudice to the opinions and submissions of distinguished colomnist, Burundi stand in a point of help from international community particularly AU. It is high time for AU to prove its existence and act to resolve the crisis and stop the carnage impeding Burundi. God Bless Burundi

Click to expand...

Humbled i am by thy comment mkuu Prof,
My thesis was just part of policy outlook that ought be suitable solution for Burundi at the moment; therefore for this purpose it was not intended to be strictly legal but exist as a stark dichotomy.(both politics and international law).

I understand that the prevention, suppression and repression of Genocide, Crimes against humanity and War crimes rests upon the whole of International community as its primary duty to ensure Peace and Security for the human family.
The UN Charter ,The Genocide Convention, The Geneva Conventions and their additional protocols and other regional instruments stipulates this.
That's why with the aid of case laws such as the Barcelona Traction Case the ICJ went further and was of the opinion that somethings even not provided by the treaty law are most unacceptable by the international community and the common dictates of the public. Therefore international crimes like Genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, terrorism and piracy are viewed to be Ergo Omnes (they are not accepted by the whole of the international community). Therefore under customary international law all nations are obliged to prevent and punish such crimes.

Now here is where my concern rise,
International law is severely affected by the International politics; this is a painful truth that most of international scholars fail to accept.
Reciprocity, Consensus, Consent and Good faith are the telos of international law, and primarily its nations that make international law valid or invalid. Therefore sometimes you might find international politics sending international law into oblivion.
A good example of this is The United Nations Security Council, people died in Syria and they keep on dying but Russian and China vetoed against any military intervention.

And better this time compared to 70's, back in the days things were worse due to the Cold War stasis.
Only UNSC Korean intervention of 1950 became possible because The Soviet Union was not present at the meeting.
But this is not the case now, times have changed and we will never allow our world to be haunted by the ghosts of the past.

Mkuu you gave an example of the former Yugoslavia,
But we must not forget that the NATO bombing campaign was very Unorthodox and it displayed what i call it the Super Power arrogance. They bombed Kosovo even without the authorization of the international community. Collateral damage was too great; and yes NATO got away with it.
I don't say this to justify the Srebrenica Massacre of the Bosnian Muslims; What Milosevic and his armies did is unjustifiable. But also unilateral action is also very dangerous for world stability.
The Clinton Administration took advantage of the situation to expand NATO to eastern Europe.

The only positive thing the international community did for the former Yugoslavia is the establishment of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.
Now i fear that some states may take advantage of the situation and dismantle Burundi.
All members of the CoW are suddenly concerned about Burundi. Even Kenya who have a history of not giving a damn about Pan-Africanism is at tip toe when it comes to Burundi.

Now lets talk about Burundi,
You have said there is an obligation under The AU treaty that calls for an intervention in case there are War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. This is per Article 4 (J) and (K).
This international law principle enshrined in the Article is called The Responsibility to Protect A.K.A RP.

Now as an international lawyer i firmly criticize the AU interpretation of the Article on the following grounds.
Firstly, there are only crimes against humanity in Burundi, the elements of War Crimes does not fit here for this purpose. This is because there are only sporadic violence and civil unrest in the country and the threshold to qualify it as a Non-International Armed Conflict is not reached. At this juncture only International Human Rights law and Domestic law applies as opposed to the law of war.

Secondly, for the purpose of determining the nature of conflict the duty solely rests upon the United Nations or the International Committee of the Red Cross as the secondary stake holder.
That's why the UN Charter provides for the Customary law of self- defense under Article 51 but sets limits by saying that member states must report to the UNSC and incase UNSC finds it fit it may order member states to cease fire until further deliberation.
This from the purview of Article 5 of the UN Charter.
Now not the African Union, European Union or the Arab League can just take any action at their hands without considering the UN. Therefore what the AU wants to burden herself with, it is way up above her shoulders.

Thirdly, The responsibility to protect is multifaceted. When nations call for intervention it is not necessarily military. It can exist in form of a pacific settlement of disputes (Article 33 of the UN charter), Blockades of Supplies eg Weapons (Article 42 of the UN Charter), Sanctions (Article 41) and Military intervention at a last resort. It can be either under Chapter 6 or Seven of the UN Charter.

On the other hand responsibility to protect can be done through punishment of crimes. A good example is the establishment of the ICTR, ICTY, Tribunal for Sierra Leone, ICC and many other decisions such as the Pinochet decision or Chuck Taylor's Case.

Fourthly, Regional Arrangements do not affect the powers of the Security Council since all regional arrangements are established under the principles of UN Charter.
This is provided by Article 42 and 35 of the UN Charter.


That's why i will still defend my opinion because African Union wants to take initiatives which may escalate more problems for Burundi and the neighbouring countries; this treachery cannot be accepted.
Peaceful settlement is the only option. Even in Syrian where millions have died the UN supports for Peace Solutions. What is so different about Burundi???


Thou i still stand to be corrected mkuu wangu.

MALCOM LUMUMBA said:

Humbled i am by thy comment mkuu Prof,
My thesis was just part of policy outlook that ought be suitable solution for Burundi at the moment; therefore for this purpose it was not intended to be strictly legal but exist as a stark dichotomy.(both politics and international law).

I understand that the prevention, suppression and repression of Genocide, Crimes against humanity and War crimes rests upon the whole of International community as its primary duty to ensure Peace and Security for the human family.
The UN Charter ,The Genocide Convention, The Geneva Conventions and their additional protocols and other regional instruments stipulates this.
That's why with the aid of case laws such as the Barcelona Traction Case the ICJ went further and was of the opinion that somethings even not provided by the treaty law are most unacceptable by the international community and the common dictates of the public. Therefore international crimes like Genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, terrorism and piracy are viewed to be Ergo Omnes (they are not accepted by the whole of the international community). Therefore under customary international law all nations are obliged to prevent and punish such crimes.

Now here is where my concern rise,
International law is severely affected by the International politics; this is a painful truth that most of international scholars fail to accept.
Reciprocity, Consensus, Consent and Good faith are the telos of international law, and primarily its nations that make international law valid or invalid. Therefore sometimes you might find international politics sending international law into oblivion.
A good example of this is The United Nations Security Council, people died in Syria and they keep on dying but Russian and China vetoed against any military intervention.

And better this time compared to 70's, back in the days things were worse due to the Cold War stasis.
Only UNSC Korean intervention of 1950 became possible because The Soviet Union was not present at the meeting.
But this is not the case now, times have changed and we will never allow our world to be haunted by the ghosts of the past.

Mkuu you gave an example of the former Yugoslavia,
But we must not forget that the NATO bombing campaign was very Unorthodox and it displayed what i call it the Super Power arrogance. They bombed Kosovo even without the authorization of the international community. Collateral damage was too great; and yes NATO got away with it.
I don't say this to justify the Srebrenica Massacre of the Bosnian Muslims; What Milosevic and his armies did is unjustifiable. But also unilateral action is also very dangerous for world stability.
The Clinton Administration took advantage of the situation to expand NATO to eastern Europe.

The only positive thing the international community did for the former Yugoslavia is the establishment of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.
Now i fear that some states may take advantage of the situation and dismantle Burundi.
All members of the CoW are suddenly concerned about Burundi. Even Kenya who have a history of not giving a damn about Pan-Africanism is at tip toe when it comes to Burundi.

Now lets talk about Burundi,
You have said there is an obligation under The AU treaty that calls for an intervention in case there are War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. This is per Article 4 (J) and (K).
This international law principle enshrined in the Article is called The Responsibility to Protect A.K.A RP.

Now as an international lawyer i firmly criticize the AU interpretation of the Article on the following grounds.
Firstly, there are only crimes against humanity in Burundi, the elements of War Crimes does not fit here for this purpose. This is because there are only sporadic violence and civil unrest in the country and the threshold to qualify it as a Non-International Armed Conflict is not reached. At this juncture only International Human Rights law and Domestic law applies as opposed to the law of war.

Secondly, for the purpose of determining the nature of conflict the duty solely rests upon the United Nations or the International Committee of the Red Cross as the secondary stake holder.
That's why the UN Charter provides for the Customary law of self- defense under Article 51 but sets limits by saying that member states must report to the UNSC and incase UNSC finds it fit it may order member states to cease fire until further deliberation.
This from the purview of Article 5 of the UN Charter.
Now not the African Union, European Union or the Arab League can just take any action at their hands without considering the UN. Therefore what the AU wants to burden herself with, it is way up above her shoulders.

Thirdly, The responsibility to protect is multifaceted. When nations call for intervention it is not necessarily military. It can exist in form of a pacific settlement of disputes (Article 33 of the UN charter), Blockades of Supplies eg Weapons (Article 42 of the UN Charter), Sanctions (Article 41) and Military intervention at a last resort. It can be either under Chapter 6 or Seven of the UN Charter.

On the other hand responsibility to protect can be done through punishment of crimes. A good example is the establishment of the ICTR, ICTY, Tribunal for Sierra Leone, ICC and many other decisions such as the Pinochet decision or Chuck Taylor's Case.

Fourthly, Regional Arrangements do not affect the powers of the Security Council since all regional arrangements are established under the principles of UN Charter.
This is provided by Article 42 and 35 of the UN Charter.


That's why i will still defend my opinion because African Union wants to take initiatives which may escalate more problems for Burundi and the neighbouring countries; this treachery cannot be accepted.
Peaceful settlement is the only option. Even in Syrian where millions have died the UN supports for Peace Solutions. What is so different about Burundi???


Thou i still stand to be corrected mkuu wangu.

Click to expand...

Mkuu you have nailed it, Sina cha kuongeza

JokaKuu said:

malcolm LUMUMBA,

..Thank you for your well thought analysis about Burundi crisis.

..but in my humble opinion President Magufuli should not involve himself or the country in all matters related to conflicts in the great lakes region and elsewhere in Africa.

..instead I suggest that this President dedicates all his time and energies in tackling the chronic socio-economic problems that are facing our country.

.."Tanzania yenye viwanda" is what Magufuli promised the wananchi during the election campaigns. Watanzania walimchagua kufanya kazi hiyo na siyo kushughulika na mgogoro usiokwisha wa Warundi.

..Matatizo ya Burundi yalianza kushughulikiwa na Mwalimu Nyerere. Maraisi wote waliomfuatia pia walishughulika na mgogoro wa Burundi. Je, bado tunataka Raisi wa tano wa Tanzania ashughulike na matatizo ya Burundi?

cc Nguruvi3, MK254, ZeMarcopolo, MsemajiUkweli, Kimbunga, vyuma, mchambawima1

Click to expand...

Mkuu wangu baada ya Drama ya Mugabe na AU,
Je, Tanzania tumekubaliana na anayoyafanya Morroco?
Au ndiyo tunajenga nchi ya viwanda?

MALCOM LUMUMBA said:

Mkuu wangu baada ya Drama ya Mugabe na AU,
Je, Tanzania tumekubaliana na anayoyafanya Morroco?
Au ndiyo tunajenga nchi ya viwanda?

Click to expand...

..zamani Tz ilikuwa na ushawishi mkubwa ktk masuala kama haya.

..suala kama hili Mwalimu Nyerere na vijana wake wangeweza kupiga kampeni ya hoja na Morocco wasingerudi.

..hawa wakina Mugabe wanachopinga siyo kurudishwa tu kwa Morocco ktk AU, bali kurudishwa bila masharti yoyote yale.

..mtizamo wangu ni kwamba tumepata Raisi ambaye masuala ya diplomasia are not one of his strengths.

..Kwa hiyo ni bora kama nchi tukajielekeza kufanya yale ambayo Raisi wetu ana rekodi ya
kuyafanya vizuri. Hapa nazungumzia masuala ya miundombinu, viwanda, etc.

..Hii iwe ni awamu ya kujiimarisha kiuchumi na kijamii. Masuala ya diplomasia yaje baadaye.

NB.

..inawezekana tunaishi ktk dunia mpya kabisa. Labda masuala ya NGAWIRA yana uzito kuliko principles and ideologies. Kwamba viongozi kama Mugabe have to catch up with the new reality.

..kwa maana hiyo hoja yangu unaweza kui-re phrase namna hii: Tz ijielekeze kuwa taifa lenye nguvu za kiuchumi ili tuweze ku influence maamuzi ya vyombo kama AU, EAC, na SADC.

JokaKuu said:

..
..Hii iwe ni awamu ya kujiimarisha kiuchumi na kijamii. Masuala ya diplomasia yaje baadaye.

Click to expand...

Mkuu JokaKuu
You gave me these answers in early February, 2017.
Do you still believe that Tanzania can prosper and become an Economic behemoth in the region without diplomacy ??

.inawezekana tunaishi ktk dunia mpya kabisa. Labda masuala ya NGAWIRA yana uzito kuliko principles and ideologies. Kwamba viongozi kama Mugabe have to catch up with the new reality.

Click to expand...

You have seen the effects of politics without ideologies and values!
It is simply a disaster, leaders would only focus on achieving Empirical goals but neglect the core aspect "The People"
Today's politics is failing miserably because it is a value free phenomenon. Governments, Academics, Think Tank Groups and Citizen evaluate their success through the periphery of Scientific Development.= This is by far spoken by Dr Anthony Giddens in his book "The Third Way: Renewal of Social Democracy"

This is good but lets face it, Scientific Development is mostly value free: No, ideology in it and governments keep on vitiation their survival in the pursuit of the Holy Grail of Scientific and Economic developments. We think like this, Tanzania will be building a house in a mine field....

NB: I believe that, even thou Ujamaa and Pan-Africanism had their setbacks,
But there were intrinsic in striking a balance across the multifaceted dimension of human development, such as:

1. The People (The Epicentre of human development),
2. Politics (The Primary Vehicle for human development)
3. Economy (The Secondary Vehicle for human development)

Ultimately, nations are always in desperate need of Economic Development.
But unfortunately Economy is not an end to itself, but a means to an end....
This is very different from what Marxists like Prof Issa G Shivji and other taught us.....

..kwa maana hiyo hoja yangu unaweza kui-re phrase namna hii: Tz ijielekeze kuwa taifa lenye nguvu za kiuchumi ili tuweze ku influence maamuzi ya vyombo kama AU, EAC, na SADC.

Click to expand...

Here also i would beg to differ,
You are trailing in a Marxist and Bourgeoisie line of Understanding: It is good but, but the duo have failed miserably.
Prof Max Weber once criticised Prof Karl Marx theory of Capital, which asserts that Economy is the base of the Society. Those with Economic Power are the entitled, those with Economic Power are the ones with control, Those with Economic Power rips apart the working class through the imposition of law...This is partially true, but As Prof Weber puts, it: There are multiple sources of power in the Society rather than the Economic Entitlement.

There are some people wield a considerable power in the Society yet do not have the Economic Entitlement,
They are Culturally respected, Or religiously respected or Intellectually respected. They can influence the nation without dropping a single coin. Truth be told, most of great men who changed our world, did it without dropping a single dime.

NB: In the Community of nations, Diplomacy and International Relations.
Economic development is one of the Indication of National Power but it not an ultimate one as it has been proved.
Trade, Money and Economic development nourishes nation's power but a nations needs more than Economy so as to consolidate its power and have a very lasting survival.

America is a leading Economy but its failing miserably, Why ???:
They lived in a false dream that Economic Development is an end to itself.
This is a very narrow out-look of International Relations of the 21St Century.

Country like Great Britain,
By far have the most influence in the world of Academia than that of the United States.
It did it through Colonialism, and now its doing it through Education and Common Wealth.

Country like Tanzania,
Had a considerable influence in world affairs not because of her involvement in African Liberation.
But her domestic setup and politics demonstrated desirable values worthy of emulation by others.

Bottom line is,
We eagerly need Economic Development.
But in this Century we cannot have Economic Development through Isolation, Protectionism and Futile Trade Wars.
We need Device a serious and formidable corpus of International Politics and Diplomacy in order to drive our nation into the pool of Prosperity. This does not mean direct involvement into other nation's affairs, but building a network of cautious relationship with other nations including our competitors such as Kenya........

A holistic approach is important for this country.....And Africa at large!
(Politics, Diplomacy, Economy, Scientific Development, Values and Ideologies all at once)

CC: zitto junior , chige , Consigliere, neo1, Da'Vinci

vyuma said:

Mkuu hayo majeshi ya Africa yanafuata nini Burundi ? Burundi hakuna vita, kuna vurugu tu za wajinga wachache wanaoendeleza ukabila. Burundi nzima ipo na amani tele kabisa. Hebu tujiulize, hivi kwa nini AU inang'ang'ania kupeleka majeshi ya kulinda amani wakati hakuna vita huko ? Wakati wanakubaliana AU kupeleka majeshi Burundi haikuwa na wawakilishi, lakini museveni na kagame walikuwepo. Hao wawili unawajua walivyo na fitna ? Hima empire unaijua? Naomba niseme hivi, tena kwa herufi kubwa, ningekuwa na uwezo wa kuonana na nkurunziza ningemshauri awakusanye FD LR na ADF waanze mtanange na Kagame tena wahamie kwa Museveni ili kuziweka damu nzuri zenye kupenda amani nchini mwao, afrika na dunia nzima kwa ujumla. Kuendelea kuwepo madarakani kwa Kagame na Museveni afrika haitatulia kamwe !

Click to expand...

Mkuu, ukipandishwa basi na Jmall-I guess hamtofika mwisho wa safari (just kidding bro..) kuna ugumu wa kuielewa siasa ya Burundi hasa kipindi hiki. Wakati wa Mgogoro wa Burundi , May 2015 nilichukua flight kutoka Luanda mpaka Bujumbura for special mission. Nilishangaa situation niliyoikuta Bujumbura...It seemed perfect and peaceful. Ila nikicheki CNN nilikuwa naona picha za wakimbizi, wengine wakiwa majeruhi. Days later, nilijifanya Mkimbizi nikivukia border ya Kigoma kupitia kabonga-Burundi. Nikafika Kagunga, tukakaa 2 days. Baadae tukapelekwa kambini. Lakini wengi wao (Refugees) hawakuwa na genuine reason ya kukimbia. UNHCR PLUS VYOMBO VYA USALAMA VYA BONGO HAVIKUSHITUKA, WAKAJUA MIMI MKIMBIZI, wakanitupa kambini kama wakimbizi wengine. baadae nikaondoka kwa njia nazozijua mwenyewe to washington, then back to Luanda. I second you sir, Burundi Amani ilikuwepo but kuna kikundi cha watu wachache walitaka ku-take advantages of the situation. Hii picha hapo chini niliichukua 1 week after the crisis, downtown-Bujumbura.

CC: zitto junior nadhani uzi ni huu hapa!

Malcom Lumumba said:

CC: zitto junior nadhani uzi ni huu hapa!

Click to expand...

Duuuh vintage JF, huu uzi ulikuwa moto kwa kweli kila post nayosoma ni kama vile nipo lecture room!!! ila mkuu bado sijapata msimamo wako kuhusu ukweli wa Rwandan genocide kuna ule uzi tulikuita ila ulisita kuchangia i hope siku moja utupe mtazamo wako kuhusu siasa za Rwanda ambazo ndani ya miaka hii 20 zimeaffect sana siasa za maziwa makuu be it DRC uganda ama burundi

zitto junior said:

Duuuh vintage JF, huu uzi ulikuwa moto kwa kweli kila post nayosoma ni kama vile nipo lecture room!!! ila mkuu bado sijapata msimamo wako kuhusu ukweli wa Rwandan genocide kuna ule uzi tulikuita ila ulisita kuchangia i hope siku moja utupe mtazamo wako kuhusu siasa za Rwanda ambazo ndani ya miaka hii 20 zimeaffect sana siasa za maziwa makuu be it DRC uganda ama burundi

Click to expand...

Mkuu unataka ujue msimamo wangu ili wanitafute kama Marehemu Prof. Juan Mwaikusa ???

Malcom Lumumba said:

Mkuu unataka ujue msimamo wangu ili wanitafute kama Marehemu Prof. Juan Mwaikusa ???

Click to expand...

Dah usitukumbushe mkuu kuhusu huo msiba mzito Yaani mtu unamalizwa kisa kupigania ukweli na haki.... Naamini hata kwa Mch Mtikila kuna siri nzito imefichwa maana aliweka nondo nzito huku mitandaoni hadi JF kuhusu genocide na Hema empire!!!

Malcom Lumumba said:

Its happening again in Burundi

Click to expand...

Burundi imeshasema inahujumiwa na Rwanda.