/ 3 August 2007

Little has been achieved since Burundian ceasefire

The implementation of the ceasefire agreement between the Burundian government and the rebel Palipehutu-FNL (FNL) reached an impasse last week after the FNL went underground, complaining of biased mediation and failed promises.

The FNL said that a lack of progress with the Joint Verification Monitoring Mechanism (JVMM), set up under the ceasefire agreement signed last year, led it to abandon the process. It also accused the South African mediation team of ”torpedoing” efforts to implement agreement.

”The South African facilitation does not facilitate the implementation of agreements signed between the Burundian government and the FNL,” it said.

The FNL said its delegates left their residence in the capital, Bujumbura, because African Union troops mandated to protect the FNL delegation attempted to restrict its movements. It claimed to have received threats from a high-ranking Burundian army official that war would be declared if the FNL continued to demand ”implementation of the political agreements” of June 18 2006.

Mamadou Bah, the AU’s special representative in Burundi, rejected the FNL’s accusations and said AU troops were reinforced only to ensure the delegates’ safety. ”We are in charge of their protection only and not to control them; we have no right to restrict their movements,” said Bah.

Observers in Burundi believed the FNL’s sudden disappearance signalled an attempt to put pressure on the government for concessions in the negotiations.

”They [the FNL] want to raise the stakes, as the negotiations are not progressing and the government is not doing what they agreed on. They [the FNL] want the international community to be made aware of their problems, so it is easier for the FNL to advance their list of demands,” said Fidele Sebushahu, a Burundian journalist.

The South African envoy to the Great Lakes, Kingsley Mamabolo, said not much had been achieved since the signing of the ceasefire agreement. ”There is a lot of mistrust, which makes each step difficult. Our role is to make them sit down and not resort to violence for resolution. Both sides need to create a conducive climate.

”[By now] we are supposed to have people in assembly points, establish the disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration [DDR] process — that hasn’t happened … By now we should have moved on the issue of the release of political prisoners. The truth of the matter is that in terms of our deadline, it is running behind,” said Mamabolo.

Jan van Eck, an expert on the Burundi peace process, agreed that little has been achieved. He believed the problem lay within the contents of the agreement. ”The whole ceasefire agreement was flawed. It has a fatal weakness [which is] that the accord was imposed and that is why the FNL continues to say they have to negotiate. The fact that the FNL delegates left is a symptom of a problem of a stalled peace process.”

The immediate challenge was to bring the FNL back to the negotiating table. ”We do not know where they are, therefore the talks cannot begin,” said Hafsa Mossi, a government spokesperson.

Sources indicated that the FNL wants the South African mediation team to be replaced with one led by Tanzanian President Jakaya Kikwete, because they believe the South African government is biased against Burundi’s government.

Mamabolo said that the South Africans were in touch with the rebels and will meet them soon.

Despite numerous attempts, the Mail & Guardian failed to get hold of Pasteur Habimana, the FNL spokesperson.

”The bottom line is we’ve taken two horses to the water and they both refuse to drink. That is our dilemma. Both parties are not happy and that is fundamentally what is blocking the implementation process,” said Van Eck.