Arrow Down Arrow Left Arrow Right Arrow Up Camera icon set icon set Ellipsis icon set Facebook Favorite Globe Hamburger List Mail Map Marker Map Microphone Minus PDF Play Print RSS Search Share Trash Crisiswatch Alerts and Trends Box - 1080/761 Copy Twitter Video Camera Youtube
Cameroun : mieux vaut prévenir que guérir
Cameroun : mieux vaut prévenir que guérir
Prospect of Talks and Threat of Escalation Both Rise in Yemen
Prospect of Talks and Threat of Escalation Both Rise in Yemen
Briefing 101 / Africa

Cameroun : mieux vaut prévenir que guérir

La stabilité apparente du Cameroun dissimule une multitude tensions internes et externes qui menacent le futur du pays. Sans un changement social et politique, un Cameroun fragilisé pourrait devenir un autre foyer d’instabilité dans la région.

Synthèse

L’apparente stabilité du Cameroun et les récentes améliorations institutionnelles ne dissimulent plus sa vulnérabilité. Alors que le régime du président Paul Biya a verrouillé le jeu électoral et consolidé son emprise, la vie politique est anémiée, le mécontentement social se généralise et de nouvelles menaces sécuritaires émergent. La combinaison des menaces externes (Boko Haram et la crise centrafricaine) et de l’in­satisfaction interne constitue un cocktail déstabilisateur. Paradoxalement, la force du régime ne réside pas dans le parti au pouvoir ou les services de sécurité, mais dans le fait que la plupart des Camerounais pensent que ce régime est un moindre mal. Pour minimiser le risque de crise violente avant la prochaine élection en 2018, le pouvoir et l’opposition doivent renouer le dialogue et s’accorder sur une profonde réforme politique et institutionnelle.

La question pour tous les observateurs de la vie politique camerounaise, qu’ils soient camerounais ou étrangers, est toujours la même : celle de la transition politique post-Biya et de la stabilité du pays. Après 32 années de présidence, Paul Biya, âgé de 81 ans et réélu en 2011 pour sept ans, ne semble pas prêt à renoncer au pouvoir en 2018. L’International Crisis Group soulignait déjà en 2010 les fragilités dissimulées par le statu quo non violent et les dangers d’une trop grande fracture entre le régime et la société. Depuis lors, les fragilités se sont accentuées.

Malgré des améliorations institutionnelles demandées de longue date par l’op­po­sition et la société civile (nouveau code électoral et création du Sénat), le parti présidentiel, le Rassemblement démocratique du peuple camerounais (RDPC), exerce toujours une domination outrancière du champ politique. Sur fond d’allégations de fraudes électorales, les scrutins de 2011 et 2013 ont réduit l’opposition à un rôle de figurant au parlement, dans les villes et communes, et signifié l’improbabilité d’une alternance par les urnes.

Malgré la prolifération des médias et des associations, la société civile a perdu l’in­fluence qu’elle avait durant les années 1990. Une partie est sous l’influence du régime, l’autre sous la perfusion des financements étrangers. A cause de la corruption, du chômage et de la pauvreté, le secteur des organisations non gouvernementales (ONG) et des associations est devenu un véritable marché, avec comme conséquence une faible influence sur les politiques publiques.

Par ailleurs, certains des piliers du régime se fissurent. Le RDPC est travaillé par des tensions internes tandis que les forces de sécurité apparaissent divisées et sous forte pression. Leur mise à l’épreuve par les menaces extérieures que sont Boko Haram, qui a étendu ses activités à l’extrême Nord du Cameroun, et la crise centrafricaine, pourrait accentuer la fragilité de l’appareil de sécurité et amplifier le mécontentement interne.

La conjonction d’une pression sécuritaire externe et d’un blocage social et politique interne est un cocktail explosif en cas de transition imprévue. Comme l’ont démontré les scrutins de 2011 et 2013, ni l’opposition ni la société civile ne sont en mesure de canaliser un mécontentement social qui s’approfondit sur fond de fracture générationnelle et laisse augurer des luttes sociales violentes, marquées par l’irruption des cadets sociaux. La population majoritairement jeune (l’âge moyen de la population est de dix-neuf ans) et souvent sans emploi perçoit l’élite dirigeante vieillissante comme le principal facteur de blocage du pays.

Les recommandations du précédent rapport de Crisis Group (transparence du processus électoral, mise en place des institutions prévues par la Constitution et réforme de la lutte contre la corruption) demeurent valides. Elles doivent être complétées par un accord de gestion de la transition post-Biya entre les tenants du régime, l’opposition et la société civile, garanti par un témoin international (l’Union africaine) et qui prévoit :

  • la création d’un cadre de dialogue entre le pouvoir et l’opposition pour négocier et adopter les réformes institutionnelles ;
     
  • le rajeunissement de la classe politique camerounaise, notamment par l’instau­ration de quotas d’âge dans les instances dirigeantes des partis politiques ;
     
  • la promesse du président Biya de ne pas se représenter en 2018 en échange d’une absence de poursuites (hors crimes relevant du statut de Rome) et du maintien de ses avoirs ;
     
  • l’organisation de primaires dans les partis politiques camerounais, y compris au sein du parti au pouvoir, avant 2018 ;
     
  • la réorganisation des modes de désignation des membres de la Cour suprême, du Conseil constitutionnel et de l’instance chargée de l’organisation des élections pour garantir l’indépendance de ces organismes ; et

la réduction du mécontentement au sein des forces de défense par l’octroi des mêmes équipements, salaires et avantages financiers aux unités d’élite et aux unités de l’armée régulière déployées à l’extrême Nord, et par leur rotation régulière.

Nairobi/Bruxelles, 4 septembre 2014

Prospect of Talks and Threat of Escalation Both Rise in Yemen

As the Yemen war enters its fourth year, prospects for military escalation are growing between Saudi Arabia and its allies, particularly the United States, and Iran. In this excerpt from the Watch List 2018 – First Update, Crisis Group warns European policy makers of the risks of a looming Saudi-led coalition invasion of Hodeida. We urge the European Union to take a clear public position against it and assist the UN envoy in reviving a more inclusive and realistic political process.

This commentary is part of our Watch List 2018 – First Update.

As the Yemen war enters its fourth year, prospects for military escalation and greater regional spillover are growing. The Saudi-led coalition’s military campaign along the Red Sea coast and in the Huthis’ home governorate of Saada, coupled with intermittent missile barrages fired by the Huthis at Saudi Arabia, threaten to quash the opportunity to revive the political process presented by the appointment of a new UN special envoy, Martin Griffiths. Military escalation could trigger direct confrontation between Saudi Arabia and its allies, particularly the United States, and Iran, which Riyadh accuses of assisting the Huthis in developing their missile program.

In this environment, the EU and its member states should:

  • As an urgent priority, help prevent the looming Saudi-led coalition invasion of the Red Sea port of Hodeida, which would compound the already acute humanitarian crisis and could spark a wider war; such efforts would involve diplomatic engagement with Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, ideally in coordination with the United States; and publicly opposing such an invasion, while condemning and pressing the Huthis to end their missile attacks against Saudi Arabia. Quiet outreach to Tehran could help, urging Iran to use what influence it has with the Huthis to discourage such missile attacks.
     
  • Assist the UN envoy in reviving a political process that is more inclusive and realistic. EU member states on the UN Security Council (France, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom) could promote a new Security Council resolution that better supports the UN envoy’s efforts than the April 2015 Resolution 2216, which is outdated and places unrealistic demands on the Huthis. The EU delegation to Yemen is well placed to assist the new envoy if talks materialise, notably by encouraging the Huthis’ cooperation.
     
  • Adopt a clear, public policy line on south Yemen, where separatist sentiment is increasing; such a line would oppose a unilateral move toward independence but recognise southern Yemenis’ grievances and the importance of revisiting the question of state structure and decentralisation.
     
  • Continue urgent efforts to alleviate the war’s humanitarian fallout, including by demanding from the coalition unhindered humanitarian and commercial access to all seaports, including Hodeida, as well as the Sanaa airport.
     

Risks of Escalation and an Opening for Diplomacy

On 4 December 2017, the Huthis killed their former partner, Ali Abdullah Saleh. Since then, the Saudi-led coalition and its Yemeni allies have acted as if the military and political tides have shifted in their favour. They have tried to pull former Saleh supporters to their side, encouraged rifts within the Huthi movement, stepped up efforts to target the group’s leadership and pressed the Huthis on a number of war fronts.

In these endeavours they have had some success. Between December 2017 and February 2018 the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and aligned Yemeni fighters won important tactical victories in Hodeida and Taiz provinces. Since then coalition-aligned forces have made small but steady gains, though not enough to shift the overall military balance. As in the past, the coalition has overestimated its ability to harm the Huthis in their northern highland strongholds. On 19 April, a coalition airstrike killed the head of the Huthi Supreme Political Council, Saleh Sammad, the de-facto president of the north and the highest-ranking Huthi killed thus far. Known as a moderate within the movement who could work with the late President Saleh’s party, his death is unlikely to reap significant military gains for the Saudi-led coalition but is a blow to peace prospects. Internal divisions within the anti-Huthi front continue to be its Achilles heel: some pro-Saleh fighters have joined the war against the Huthis, but many refuse to support President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi and his partners in Islah, an Islamist party. Islah and Hadi affiliates are at particular odds with UAE-aligned groups in areas such as Taiz and in south Yemen, which was an independent state prior to 1990.

After killing Saleh, the Huthis are simultaneously more open to diplomacy and more willing to up the military ante in response to coalition offensives. They have stated publicly and privately that they are ready to negotiate with Saudi Arabia over security concerns and to re-engage with the UN process under the new envoy. It is unclear if this readiness is a product of military pressure or an increased sense of security, as in the past the Huthis had cause to worry that Saleh would strike a deal behind their backs. Either way, their increased interest in talks offers hope of a political breakthrough.

For the Huthis, coalition attacks on Hodeida, the main port in the territories they control, and Saada, their home governorate, represent existential threats.

That said, 2018 has seen an unprecedented uptick in Huthi missile attacks on Saudi Arabia. There is growing evidence of Iranian supply of Huthi weapons, including missile and drone technologies. For the Huthis, coalition attacks on Hodeida, the main port in the territories they control, and Saada, their home governorate, represent existential threats. Hodeida in particular is a red line. The coalition’s blockade, ostensibly to prevent weapons smuggling to the Huthis, has made the port a chokepoint for goods entering the north; prolonged fighting there could compound Yemen’s humanitarian disaster manifold. The Huthis have proclaimed they are willing to sink commercial ships to deter an attack. In April, Saudi Arabia accused the Huthis of firing on a Saudi-flagged oil tanker in the Red Sea, the first attack of its kind.

Recommendations for the EU and its Member States

To avoid this scenario and the regional escalation it could trigger, the EU should take a clear public position against a coalition attack on Hodeida for both humanitarian and political reasons, and engage in vigorous diplomacy, in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and Washington, to help prevent it. Diplomatic efforts also should be directed toward encouraging both sides to de-escalate the conflict ahead of a possible resumption of talks. This could include the Huthis halting missile strikes at Saudi Arabia and ships in the Red Sea in return for the Saudi-led coalition stopping their offensive moves into Saada and along the Red Sea coast in Hodeida and Taiz provinces. The new UN envoy, with the help of the EU delegation and member states, could broker such an agreement.

If military escalation can be held at bay, the envoy will have a chance to revive negotiations over a cessation of hostilities and a return to an internal Yemeni political process. To be successful, these efforts will need a new framework that improves the one set forth in UN Security Council Resolution 2216. That resolution sets out a bilateral structure for talks between the Hadi government and the Huthi-Saleh bloc, which has become outdated and which never represented the range of Yemeni forces with influence on the ground. It also places unrealistic preconditions for a political settlement on the Huthis, including requiring them to withdraw from territories gained and hand over weapons. The EU, and in particular Security Council members France, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom – the latter being the penholder on the Yemen crisis – should press for a new resolution that would support the UN envoy’s efforts based on his plan for reviving the political process, which he will present in June 2018.

The EU delegation is uniquely placed to assist the UN envoy in improving the structure and substance of potential negotiations [in Yemen].

The EU delegation is uniquely placed to assist the UN envoy in improving the structure and substance of potential negotiations. As a non-belligerent in the Yemen war, the EU has access to all sides, including the Huthis. The delegation could assist in communicating with and encouraging Huthi cooperation at the various stages of talks. Information and lessons from EU-sponsored Track II events during the course of the war, particularly with local security stakeholders, could help guide the process of improving intra-Yemeni negotiations. The EU and its member states should work with the UN envoy to produce a negotiating framework that more effectively includes women and other civil society representatives in decision-making roles early in the process, a deficiency during the last three rounds of UN-sponsored talks.

South Yemen, where separatist sentiment is strong and the UAE is supporting separatist-leaning groups, is a critical flashpoint. In effect, the south is moving toward independence, but not all southern stakeholders support the idea. Nor do Yemenis in the north. The EU and its member states should have a clear, public policy line that opposes a unilateral move toward independence but recognises southern Yemenis’ grievances and the need to revisit the question of state structure and decentralisation, which remained unresolved in Yemen’s 2014 National Dialogue Conference. The EU delegation and member state representatives should also prioritise engaging with the UAE-supported Southern Transition Council and other southern political groups, and support their inclusion in intra-Yemeni negotiations.

Finally, ameliorating the war’s humanitarian impact should remain a top priority. The numbers are staggering. Over 22 million Yemenis – three quarters of the population – need humanitarian assistance. Of those, 8.4 million are at risk of starvation. Three million are internally displaced, mostly women and children.

The EU and member states should continue to demand unhindered humanitarian and commercial access to all seaports, including Hodeida, as well as Sanaa airport. To assist in their full opening, the EU is well placed to offer assistance to the UN in negotiating and possibly implementing security checks that address the Saudi-led coalition’s legitimate concerns regarding arms smuggling. They should also press the Huthis to allow unhindered humanitarian access to areas they control and to ease restrictions on aid workers operating in these areas. Beyond physical access, the EU should work with the Yemeni Central Bank to stabilise the value of the Yemeni riyal and promote a political compromise by which the Hadi government pays salaries to all civil servants nationwide, including in Huthi-controlled territories.