As the last and deadly battles still pit “loyalists” and “rebels” against the incumbent President Idriss Déby in the capital N’Djamena, this new Chadian war is more of an embarrassment than a direct threat to one of the key components of the French strategy in Africa. Apparently encouraged by the Sudanese regime, the rebels decided last weekend to intensify their operations in the field and to launch a decisive assault on the capital. They likely wanted to get ahead of the arrival of the EUFOR military contingent, laboriously set up by the 27 countries of the European Union and officially intended to ensure the “security of over 400,000 Darfur refugees and internally displaced persons on Chadian soil.” A statement that deceives no one about the collateral capabilities of these 3,700 soldiers, more than 2,100 of whom are French, to hinder the movements of the rebels. Not to mention the indirect aid—logistical, medical, and intelligence—provided to the legal authorities by the French under a 1976 bilateral agreement.
But France knows Africa well, having gradually become accustomed – not without regret – to its endless upheavals. It publicly condemns the operations of the opponents in Chad, has its mirages fly over the Chadian capital, and then prudently withdraws them to show an apparent neutrality in the conflict. Only apparent, if one listens carefully to Bernard Kouchner who rejects the term “neutrality” and advocates more for “seeking an arrangement” among the various protagonists. The ambivalence of the French positions is echoed in the statements of the assailants: speaking from Paris, the rebel representative, Ousmane Hissen could initially assert that the “interests of France” would not be challenged if his friends made it to the presidency. A statement contradicted a few hours later by his supporters on the ground who threaten Paris with an attack on the airport.
As tumultuous as they are, the relations between Africa and France nevertheless remain marked by an extraordinary continuity. And one might think that after a reasonable period, today’s “rebels” could become tomorrow’s “legitimate leaders” received with all honors on the steps of the Elysée Palace. Other examples confirm this. Following the break in diplomatic relations in 2006, Kigali and Paris have lately been multiplying meetings and benevolent statements while the genocide of the Tutsis continues, fourteen years later, to poison French political life: two former Prime Ministers Alain Juppé and Edouard Balladur, in charge of the state at that time, indeed disliked the statements of the Minister of Foreign Affairs Bernard Kouchner about the “political fault” of Paris in this matter. The French military leadership remains vigilant about a regime that has made the worst accusations against French soldiers. Regardless of whether the current Rwandan leader Paul Kagame is implicated by French justice in the April 1994 attack against the plane of his predecessor Juvénal Habyarimana, that Idriss Déby was also brought to power eighteen years ago by a coup d’état, just like his Congolese counterpart Denis Sassou Ngesso, Paris must navigate carefully. One can always question French policy towards the African continent. But it would also be fair to redirect this question to the leaders of the continent themselves. Nicolas Sarkozy dares, through his Dakar speech, to lament the “immobility of the African man…not sufficiently entered into history”, on another day he calls for French diplomacy “to act closer to civil society, deliberately oriented towards the youth of Africa”, the Secretary of State for Cooperation Jean-Marie Bockel wishes in his vows “to sign the death certificate of Françafrique,” and immediately France is accused of neocolonialism, the President of Gabon denounces “ignorance of the realities of Franco-African cooperation” and that of Congo criticizes the “interferences” of Paris. But when the Public Prosecutor dismisses, due to “insufficiently characterized offense,” the complaint filed by several associations against five African leaders for embezzlement of public funds, Paris is also accused of supporting corrupt regimes in place.
Perhaps one day a choice will have to be made. A choice to prevent, as in the case of Kenya, terrible violence from being attributed, as Kofi Annan and Ban Ki-Moon solemnly emphasized at the announcement of a fragile ceasefire agreement in Nairobi, to “economic and social inequalities” in the country.
