Which way to Mauritania?

Last year, the military overthrew the president after two decades of shambolic rule. He claimed he was a democrat, having won the elections in 2003. The African Union condemned the coup. So did the US State Department. However, cracks appeared in this show of unity. Representatives from the African Union were invited to talk to ordinary people in the capital. They found the coup had (apparently) widespread popular support. However, the constitution of the African Union forced it to suspend Mauritania and they intend to do so until free and fair elections are held.

The Americans were in a similar predicament. US foreign aid is governed by the Foreign Assistance Act. Section 508 requires "the suspension of all US foreign aid in a country that has had a military coup against a democratic government," according to Herman J Cohen, the aforementioned ex-Ambassador.

Guess what?
Those elections in 2003 were monitored by US democracy organisations. They did not give their seal of approval to those elections. This meant that the US government was able to ignore Section 508 since they could claim the government had not received a democratic mandate. This enabled their military to continue their intimate relationship with Mauritania's military. Nevertheless, as champions of democracy, something had to be done. The US ambassador was recalled as a sign of displeasure at the coup.

Nevertheless, the Mauritanian military had done their homework. They set up a junta of 17 senior officers. They are now running the country via a transition civilian government. The civilians come from Mauritania's civil society, namely lawyers, professionals, economists, etc.

The military officers in the junta have declared that they will not run in any future election. The next one is going to be free and fair because it will be held under UN supervision, within two years. They have agreed that the previous regime's president, his family and cronies will not be harassed. All political prisoners have been released. All, that is, except for "Islamic militants."

That last point perhaps gives us a clue. Had not the coup occurred, there was a perception that there would have been an Islamic takeover a few years down the road. Now it makes sense why an overstretched US military would be bothered with a small African army. The answer lies in their extensive support to Mauritania, Mali, and Niger against the Islamic guerrillas.

So, which is more important? Democracy or the War on (Islamic) Terror, now renamed as the Fifty Year Long War?

Points to ponder
1. The military officers were able to find civil society leaders willing to play this charade of being in power. Did they discuss this before or after the change in regime?

2. Does "transition government" sound at all like "two year caretaker government"?

3. An underlying Islamic threat seems to have sidestepped the rock-solid defence and promotion of democracy. Hmm.

4. Disaffection with the status quo and popular relief at military intervention seems to have justified events too. How do they measure this feeling and is the survey scientific? How many people did they talk to?

Not in our backyard
Reading so far, you might have been wondering if it could happen here. You can safely put it out of your mind. You see, there are no similarities with the situation in Bangladesh. Absolutely none.

We have a thriving, flourishing democracy where regimes are changed via a unique system of holding elections. These elections have all been free and fair. How do we know that? Didn't Jimmy Carter say so?

Ah, you are wondering, why, if it has worked so well, do we need to amend this excellent system? Why are the opposition and some other friends so keen on this even if it paints the government into a corner? Why make the whole process controversial and open to boycott and doubt?

Good point. I am stumped.
What about the people? Are they not frustrated with the shambles? Are they not "disaffected" and willing to ditch democracy? Do not believe those scare mongering newspapers. Our people are resilient. They understand that the abnormally high price of food is only a temporary blip. You might think four years is a long time for a blip.

Then again, did not a senior minister say that the arrival of the winter vegetables would bring down those prices? That must have passed me by. Since then we have been perplexed by the blockades of highways by farmers demanding supplies of fertilizer, diesel and electricity. There is no crisis, according to the cabinet. Load shedding will be solved by next summer, so why bother to surround electricity corporation offices and make such a fuss?

Even the "Islamic militant" top honchos are being arrested. Are George W and C Rice watching from next door? Does that not spoil the scenario of an imminent Islamic challenge? Isn't it how amazing how they did not exist, then they did exist, and how now they are gone?

I wonder when they will be back.

Farid Bakht has written his first book, Arrival or Departure: Bangladesh in Dangerous Times and spends his time between London and Dhaka.