Statements cannot disguise Burundi inaction

It is a pity the sensitivity of the Department of Foreign Affairs to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people in Africa…

It is a pity the sensitivity of the Department of Foreign Affairs to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people in Africa is not as alert as its preciousness when criticised for its indifference.

Last week in this column I criticised the Department, which currently presides over the coordination of the foreign policy of the European Union, for the vaporous statement it had issued on the recent massacres in Burundi.

I recalled the shameful stance of Ireland on the massacre of the Muslim population of Bosnia - we were in favour of doing nothing, apart from depriving the beleaguered population of the means of defending itself and regretted that this disgrace seemed now to be repeated in relation to Burundi.

This was all the more deplorable given that we were now in a position to exercise more influence in foreign affairs than would normally be the case, given that we hold the EU presidency.

READ MORE

Hot-foot on the publication of these remarks there was a letter from the junior Minister in the Department of Foreign Affairs, Joan Burton, published last Friday. It opened with an implied assurance that Ms Burton could identify where Burundi was in a blank map of Africa (well, thank God for that, anyway). It went on to make the following points:

. The statement of August 19th which I criticised was "primarily a declaration of principles" and, (by implication) understandably vague.

. Intensive local mediation efforts were under way, involving the former Tanzanian president, Julius Nyerere, which were being strongly supported by the EU.

. Mr Nyerere regarded the Irish statement of August 19th, which I had characterised as "waffle", as "an important restatement of support" for his efforts.

. A proposal for a military force, drawn from neighbouring states, with logistical support from the international community, was being "actively considered"; the implication being that Ireland and the European Union were supportive of this idea.

. She herself had just returned from a trip to the region where she had discussed the situation in Burundi with various important people.

. Burundi would continue to receive "the closest attention" from Ireland and its European partners.

Note, not a word of defence for Ireland's policy on Bosnia, which I had described as shameful.

THE statement of August 19th was the fifth such to be issued by the EU presidency in seven weeks. All were in the same vein. What, then, was the need to make yet again "a declaration of principles", if not to hide the absence of any substantive response to the crisis?

I tried to get in touch with Mr Nyerere on his alleged response to the Iveagh House statement of August 19th, which I had described as "waffle" and which Ms Burton said Mr Nyerere regarded as "important". So far I have failed to make contact.

However, an interview with Mr Nyerere was published in the New York Times as recently as last Saturday, some five days after the August 19th statement was issued from Iveagh House.

Remarkably, Mr Nyerere makes no reference to this "important" expression of support for his efforts. In fact, Mr Nyerere gave quite a different impression about his attitudes to western "support" for his efforts. A section of the interview reads: "Nyerere said he was slightly surprised by the lack of support the East African leaders had gotten from western diplomats, who have balked at joining the [trade] embargo [on Burundi] or to condemn the coup.

It is surprising that Ms Burton, who has "just returned" from meeting Mr Nyerere in Dar-es-Salaam, did not glean from him his scepticism of western support for his efforts. (What was she doing there?)

It is also surprising that Ms Burton, during her travels or since then, did not learn of further scepticism about the interest of the "international community" in what is going on in Burundi. In a report issued last Wednesday to the UN Security Council, the UN Secretary-General, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, said "military intervention to save lives might become an inescapable imperative".

He spoke in terms of a troop contingent of 50,000 being required. However, only 14 of the 86 countries approached by the UN to indicate what contribution they might be prepared to make to a peacekeeping mission responded positively. Only three countries (Ethiopia, Uganda and Tanzania) offered troops. Dr Ghali said: "I have doubts about the willingness of member states to provide troops for an operation on this scale, or to finance it."

The "important" statement from Iveagh House of August 19th must not have been brought to Dr Ghali's attention before he issued his report to the UN Security Council two days later. No doubt he will be reassured that Iveagh House will continue to give the "closest attention" to Burundi.

I was not the only person to be unimpressed by the "important" statement of August 19th. On Thursday last the director of Trocaire, Mr Justin Kilcullen, described the "important" statement as "morally and legally bankrupt" and "totally inadequate". He said: "We have observed the disintegration of both Rwandan and Burundian society. The European Union seems to think that platitudes will suffice as action. Burundi cannot wait until the European holiday season is over."

Mr Kilcullen quoted from a recent statement by the Catholic bishops of Burundi: "The horrors conveyed to us and which we have witnessed have gone beyond all limits. Many of our fellow-citizens have developed behaviour patterns which are not human-like.

"They kill children, the elderly and even the disabled. Not only do they attack the able bodies but they kill the sick on their sick-beds in hospital. They kill community leaders, ordinary citizens, Burundians and farmers. They kill livestock and destroy homes."

Mr Kilcullen called for the international community to act in the face of clear evidence of genocide. Ireland, he said, had a moral obligation to give a lead on this, given its EU role.

IRELAND giving moral leads on anything in the sphere of foreign policy is a joke, in spite of our puffed-up opinions about ourselves. To take just one measure of our credibility in this area: of the 21 member-countries of the OECD (essentially the developed world), Ireland comes third-last (only New Zealand and the United States fare worse) in the percentage of our GNP that we devote to overseas development aid.

In 1994 we allocated a miserly 0.25 per cent of our GNP to aid. Norway gave nearly five times as much.

Did any of the important people you met in your recent travels in Africa say anything about that, Ms Burton, or did they not know that you were the Minister of State responsible for Irish development aid?