Catch-22 in Zaire

The tragedy in eastern Zaire has presented the world with a catch-22 situation. Sending in badly needed food relief for over one million refugees who are on the verge of starvation is a risky and futile venture, as long as the war on the ground continues. The UN Security Council, the only institution that has the ability to mobilize force and aid of a significantly sizable amount, now stands accused of being indifferent as thousands of Hutu refugees and displaced Zaireans are dying by the hour.

It is unfair to put all the blame on the Security Council. Past UN aid relief operations show that as long as the situation on the ground remains fluid, any food convoy it sends will be vulnerable to robbery and manipulated for the political interests of those who control the passages. This happened in Somalia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Without the minimum presence of a UN force, there is no guarantee that food relief will reach the intended recipients. This would, in turn, aggravate the situation.

Nor can we blame the Security Council for not trying. It has made a commitment to sending aid into Zaire, and UN Secretary General Boutros Boutrost-Ghali has sent special envoy Raymond Chretien on a mission to Zaire, Rwanda and Uganda to negotiate with leaders there for some guarantees of support, without which the operation cannot go ahead. Like any diplomatic negotiations, progress is frustratingly slow.

What the Security Council has not done is to come up with a multinational force that should administer not only the food relief operation but also, hopefully, an arms truce that should be secured ahead of any massive UN food relief operation.

The United States, which holds the key to the establishment of a UN force, is not making any commitments. Still traumatized by the bitter experience of its humanitarian operation in Somalia, Washington will think twice before sending American soldiers to Africa, no matter how noble the intention may be. But who can blame Washington? No sane leader would ever send their troops for a peacekeeping or humanitarian operation in another country if there are no minimum guarantees about their safety.

The world may be facing a catch-22 situation, but one should not give up hope altogether. It is certainly no pretext for inaction. The situation makes it all the more imperative that a comprehensive solution to the crisis must be found, and quickly.

The diplomacy being conducted by UN special envoy Raymond Chretien and the European Union aid commissioner Emma Bonino in the region should not be limited to the planned relief operations. They should seek a truce and commitments or pledges from the warring parties to come to the negotiating table. Both negotiators should be given greater mandates than their present one of only discussing the passage of aid to the refugees. Or their missions should be immediately followed up with another with the necessary mandate to broker peace.

The greater blame should be placed on the leaders in Zaire and Rwanda, for they are the ones who hold the key to bringing this senseless war and carnage to an end. The world should send a strong message to these leaders that they carry the greatest responsibility for the deaths of the refugees.

The Organization of African Unity (OAU) should also take a more active role in finding a lasting solution to the ethnic war between Tutsi and Hutu tribes. We have not heard of any serious attempt by the OAU to mediate in the conflict, which is essentially an African affair needing an African solution.

The Tutsi-Hutu conflict has already spread to three countries, beginning first with Rwanda three years ago, then to Burundi and now Zaire. With Hutu refugees fleeing to Tanzania, it might be only a matter of time before a fourth country is involuntarily brought into the conflict. The war in that part of Africa is a complex one. But unless a solution is found quick, it is only going to become even more complex, and harder to solve.