. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .
A survey by CPNN based on multiple sources as shown (translation by CPNN)
Last month, we published on CPNN the proposal from Mali’s military leaders, led by Colonel Assimi Goïta, for an Inter-Malian Dialogue for Peace and National Reconciliation. Since the dialogue concluded on May 10 and presented its recommendations, we searched the results online and found contradictions, depending on the country providing the narrative.
Photo by Maliweb
The official version, published by the presidency of Mali, included the following:
“Several recommendations and resolutions emerged from this national process. Boubacar SOW, General Rapporteur of the Steering Committee of the Inter-Malian Dialogue for Peace and National Reconciliation, summarized the recommendations resulting from the deliberations, including the creation of a framework of permanent dialogue, the dissolution of self-defense militias, and the use of local traditions for conflict management.
“Certain recommendations also aim to reduce public spending, create industrial units and promote entrepreneurship. Securing borders and creating a memorial site for the nation’s martyrs have also been suggested.
“Ousmane Issoufi MAIGA, President of the Steering Committee, affirmed that the dialogue had been a democratic and inclusive process, meeting the expectations of Malians for a new peace architecture based on endogenous values.
“President GOÏTA’s speech and the recommendations resulting from the dialogue mark a decisive turning point for Mali, promising profound transformations in the political, social, security, diplomatic and economic landscape of the country.”
An article in Maliweb added more details:
“On another note, it must be a priority to know Mali first through its history and geography in order to serve it. To do this, the delegates recommended the “compulsory” teaching of the history and geography of Mali in schools up to the university They also recommended “engaging in dialogue with all Malian armed movements.” They recommended the creation of “deradicalization structures” to promote education in the Mali culture of peace. In addition to all this, for the project of peace and reconciliation, the participants wished for the “Repatriation of the deplaced” who wish to return to their country.
“Regarding political and institutional issues, the participants asked to “harden” the conditions for the creation and to reduce the number and financing of political parties. Also to prohibit religious and village leaders from engaging in the political activism, to extend the transition from 2 to 5 years and to encourage the candidacy of Colonel Assimi Goïta in the next presidential election. They also expressed their wish to see Colonels Goïta, Diaw, Camara, Wagué , Koné and Maïga “elevated to the rank of general”. “Consensus” around the transition was desired by the delegates for its recovery and stability, they did not joke about “Control of the editorial line of preaching by religious people”. Independence of justice and the transparency of the judicial chain and the acceleration of “ongoing legal procedures” were also strong recommendations.”
The preceding articles were supported by articles published or republished in Niger, in Morocco, in Chad and in Turkey.
(Article continued in right column)
(Click here for the original French version of this article.)
How can we develop the institutional framework for a culture of peace?
(Article continued from left column)
The article published in Niger, a neighboring country that recently experienced a similar military coup against French rule, was particularly positive:
“In addition, the start of the operational phase was given on April 2, 2024, marking the start of a series of meetings orchestrated by the Steering Committee. These brought together a mosaic of national actors: republican institutions , customary authorities, religious leaders, political groups and representatives of civil society, with particular attention paid to women and youth.
“Similarly, the consultative meetings, held from April 13 to 15 in 763 communes and from April 20 to 22 in Bamako as well as in the 19 administrative regions, were distinguished by their participatory and inclusive character. The national mobilization was strong, each component of society having had the opportunity to contribute to the discussions.
“Moreover, the national phase of the Dialogue stood out for its exceptional participation, testifying to the representativeness of delegates from various horizons of Malian society. The regions, the district of Bamako, the diaspora, refugees, universities, the unions and the business community have all responded.
“Finally, this dialogue process illustrates the determination of the Malian people to forge, from within, solutions to the multiple challenges that are hampering their momentum towards progress and development. By adopting an inclusive and participatory approach, Mali is committed firmly on the path to consolidating peace and working for the advent of a stable and prosperous future, a promise of harmony for all of its citizens.”
The articles published in France are negative.
Le Monde republished a press release from a collective of Malian civil society parties and organizations which denounced the process as a “masquerade”, saying that the military “wants to persist in power by taking Mali hostage and the Malians.” They added that “the authorities ignore the daily difficulties of Malians, faced with insecurity, the high cost of living, unemployment and power cuts, and “have demonstrated their notorious incapacity to provide the slightest beginning of a solution.”
Radio France Internationale wrote that “the political parties of the Declaration of March 31, a coalition which brings together almost all Malian parties, all tendencies combined, reject the conclusions of this dialogue described as a “grotesque political trap”. In their eyes, the Malians “have been duped.” For the Malian political parties, whose activities were suspended last month, the objective of the colonels who have ruled the country for almost four years is clear: “They want to stay in power. by taking Mali and the Malians hostage.”
The article in Radio France Internationale was republished by Yahoo News and by All Africa.
The critique by the coalition of political parties of the March 31 Declaration was published in detail by Seneplus, based in Senegal.
Some other sources based in Africa were also critical, but to a lesser extent than those based in France.
An article from Bamada.net, based in Mali, says that “On reading certain recommendations, one easily understands that the Steering Committee was, at a given moment, carried away by the facts. This is why in the final document, no recommendations concern the guarantee of freedom of expression and freedom of the press, as well as the accountability of the authorities towards taxpayers And yet these elements are essential for lasting peace.”
An article by LePays, based in Burkina Faso, says that “a good number of Malians did not take part in the talks and therefore do not feel committed to the conclusions that emerged. This is the case of a significant segment of the political class, civil society and armed groups in the North. These excluded from dialogue do not intend to watch, idly, the confiscation of power in Mali and are preparing to use all means at their disposal to be heard. . . . We cannot help but say that the discordant voices which are heard at the end of this dialogue process prove, once again, that the Malians have placed the emphasis on what divides them more than on what unites them.”
– – – – – –
If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.