Nov 10, 2010

Great Lakes Policy Forum - Burundi Remarks

Dave Peterson
Senior Director for Africa, NED

It is a great pleasure to be here this morning on the same panel with Search for Common Ground’s field representatives from Burundi, Rwanda and DRC.  Search does great work in these countries and around the world, and I will not presume to have more expert knowledge than those who are working on the ground as they are. 

It’s also an exceptional pleasure to be on a panel moderated by Howard Wolpe, a former NED board member who was responsible for Africa, and who has made such a determined contribution to the quest for peace and democracy in the Great Lakes region.  In Burundi he is by all accounts still greatly respected and loved for his unflagging devotion to Burundi’s transition.

Some years ago I wrote a companion piece with Howard on Burundi for NED’s Journal of Democracy.  It was written shortly after the 2005 elections that brought Pierre Nkurunziza to power.  Howard’s piece focused on the experience and methodology of the Burundi Leadership Training Program, which he has since replicated in many other countries.  Although we may have had reservations due to Burundi’s long history of conflict and dictatorship, extreme poverty, and some authoritarian tendencies remaining in the CNDD-FDD, we were both pretty optimistic about Burundi’s new course.  I was certainly hopeful that Burundi would provide both a positive democratic example, as well as a stabilizing effect, on the entire Great Lakes region.

Although it was always a bumpy road, Burundi seemed to be staying the course until the communal elections held last spring.  The opposition was so surprised by its overwhelming defeat by the CNDD-FDD that it cried foul and boycotted the ensuing presidential and legislative elections.  Undaunted, Nkurunziza regained his seat virtually unopposed.  Yet rather than reaching out to the opposition from a position of power, the government intensified its persecution of the opposition, and has also moved against the independent media and civil society.  Human rights abuses have skyrocketed.  Much of Burundi’s democratic progress has been squandered, and a critical opportunity to reinforce peace and stability in the region has been lost.

There is plenty of blame to go around for this, but despite the terrible setback, all is not lost, and democracy may yet be salvaged. 

My remarks this morning are mainly based on a brief tour I completed of the Great Lakes region just a couple weeks ago and, true to NED form, focus on the comments and role of our partners in civil society.

The National Democratic Institute (NDI) recently completed a focus group study in Burundi that has yielded some fascinating results.  Nkurunziza is overwhelmingly popular throughout the country, with the exception of the FNL stronghold of Bujumbura Rurale.  The focus groups expressed concern about insecurity and corruption, but the ethnic divide between Hutu and Tutsi seems to have disappeared.  The political contest now is between the CNDD-FDD and FNL, both of which are dominated by Hutu, and both of which seem interested in attracting Tutsi support.  The other political parties seem to be relatively inconsequential. 

Conflict over land has increased, but it is not so much between ethnic groups or with returnees as it is brother versus brother, as families grow and small plots are subdivided.  Women are apparently much concerned about the problem of polygamy.  But no one in the focus groups favored returning to war, and they expressed a strong desire for the government to turn back from confrontation with the opposition and enter into dialogue.

By most accounts, the political opposition made a huge mistake in boycotting the elections.  They might have won respectable representation in the legislature and some local offices had they stayed in the electoral game.  The CNDD-FDD may have been heavy handed in the run-up to the elections, engaging in intimidation, buying votes, and rigging the electoral commission, but the elections themselves seem to have been reasonably peaceful and clean.  In the aftermath of the elections, however, abuses have escalated. 

Rumors about the opposition fleeing to the bush and re-arming are discounted by the government, but violent incidents, which the government attributes to banditry, still seem to be used as a pretext to commit extrajudicial killings and harass the opposition.  Although some years ago, Howard’s facilitation with negotiations and conflict resolution may have been welcome by all parties, today the CNDD-FDD has the monopoly on power and apparently sees no need to negotiate.  As the political opposition has become even weaker than it was before, civil society has reluctantly become the default opposition, and consequently, the target of government repression.

Although 60 percent of Burundi’s GNP and 25 percent of the government’s budget is derived from foreign aid, the international community seems to have remarkably little influence on the government or events in Burundi.  Evidently earlier this year there were significant gaps in the diplomatic corps that diminished their somewhat disparate efforts.  Others have argued that there was too little assistance too late to support Burundi’s fragile election process.  In most political situations in Africa I have been wary of excessive international interference, but in the case of Burundi this was probably warranted; the international community might have made a much greater contribution, but it seems to have dropped the ball.  Now, the current government seems little concerned about the occasional protests from foreign embassies.

Despite this discouraging scenario, there might still be some ways forward. 

First, Burundi’s neighbors have little interest in destabilizing the country, and are unlikely to harbor rebels, although the chaos that is building in DRC could provide some cover.  A return to full-scale civil war is doubtful; killings seem to be targeted and political rather than directed at entire communities.  Second, the space gained by civil society groups and the media in recent years is unlikely to be easily surrendered.  There are hundreds of CSOs, some very capable groups focused on human rights and democracy issues, and despite an attempt to impose more restrictive NGO laws, there is considerable unity and cooperation among groups that would make their suppression very difficult.  And according to the NDI focus groups, Burundians still value democracy.  

At the communal level, citizens have had some experience of democratic processes and accountability from their leaders, and seem to want more.  Generally, people are relatively unafraid of criticizing the government.  Positive change in Burundi will have to be led by civil society with broad support from the grassroots.  There has been a disconnect in this regard, as civil society has tended to be urban, elitist, and Tutsi-dominated, while the great majority of the population is rural, poor, and Hutu.  Nevertheless, this connection can and must be made.

The international community can be helpful by getting on the same page, by making clear and consistent statements condemning abuses, and supporting efforts at dialogue, reconciliation, and accommodation.  More resources must not only be directed at economic development, health and government priorities, but to civil society and media.

Finally, Burundi must be situated in the Great Lakes context.  Rwanda’s example of authoritarian top-down control, no matter how impressive in the short term, cannot address Burundi’s problems. 

If political parties, civil society and the media are on the defensive in Burundi, they are all but extinct in Rwanda. 

There is none of the open criticism of government in Rwanda, but a lot of fear. The democratic process, for all its weaknesses in Burundi, has also demonstrated its strengths and long-term viability.  But DRC is a looming, slow-motion catastrophe that could suck the entire region down with it.  The violence and chaos in the East is getting worse, and the possibility of this spilling over into Burundi is clear from a clash between the FARDC and FNL just a few days ago.  DRC’s dynamic civil society is beleaguered, and like its counterparts in Burundi, has reluctantly taken on the role that should be played by political parties.  If Burundi has been neglected, then DRC even more so since the 2006 elections.  The same formula of assistance to civil society and the media may be part of the answer for DRC, but the scale of the problem is so much more daunting.  It is one that remains a priority for us at the NED.