This House believes France is right to intervene in Mali

“France has answered… a request for assistance issued by the interim president of the Republic of Mali”. France is therefore not coming in uninvited. Mali’s President Traore directly appealed to French President Hollande to provide “French military assistance against these terrorist groups” that have “attacked our front lines of defense”.[1] As the former colonial power in much of West Africa, including Mali, France is the obvious country to turn to for help. As a result of this colonial past Mali is a member of the French led Organisation internationale de la Francophonie.[2] Mali is therefore fully within its sovereign rights to ask for assistance and Hollande is right to agree to provide it.  

[1] Lynch, Colum, ‘France’s U.N. envoy: French military intervention in Mali is open ended’, Foreign Policy Turtle Bay, 11 January 2013, http://turtlebay.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/01/11/france_s_un_envoy_french_military_intervention_in_mali_is_open_ended

[2] ‘Welcome to the International Organisation of La Francophonie’s official website’ http://www.francophonie.org/English.html

Mali should be asking for diplomatic help to resolve the crisis not asking for a military force. France meanwhile should not be accepting a request from an unelected President to attack his own people. A request to intervene in a country does not make that intervention legitimate it simply provides a fig leaf to protect France from accusations of colonialism.

While it was Tuareg separatists who first sparked the insurrection wanting to split Mali but now the North has been taken over by Islamists and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb presenting a terrorist threat that cannot be ignored. France’s Defence minister Jean-Yves Le Drian says "France's goal is to lead a relentless struggle against terrorist groups," and that "We have to eradicate this terrorism".[1] The United States was already clearly worried about Mali becoming a center of terrorism having on the 7^th December designated the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa a terrorist organisation while other groups involved in Mali such as al-Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb were already designated as such. The State department highlights several terrorist attacks the group has conducted such as “a March 2012 suicide attack on a police base in Tamanrasset, Algeria, which wounded 23 people”.[2]

[1] CNN Staff, ‘France determined to ‘eradicate’ terrorism in Mali, official says’, CNN, 13 January 2013, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/13/world/africa/mali-military-offensive/index.html

[2] Office of the Spokesperson, ‘Terrorist Designations of the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa, Hamad el Khairy, and Ahmed el Tilemsi’, U.S. Department of State, 7 December 2012, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/12/201660.htm

If terrorism is the concern then the French intervening is one of the worst possible options. Having France fighting in Mali may well result in the internationalization of the conflict bringing in jihadists.[1] Already the islamists are saying the conflict is a holy war as “France has attacked Islam” and they will in response “strike at the heart of France”.[2]

[1] Welsh, Jennifer, ‘Sending soldiers to Mali may be the only solution’, The Globe and Mail, 14 January 2012, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/why-france-couldnt-wait-for-a-regional-solution-in-mali/article7318783/

[2] Bamat, Joseph, ‘Mali-based Islamists pledge attacks on French soil’, France 24, 14 January 2013, http://www.france24.com/en/20130114-mali-france-intervention-terrorist-attacks

Fundamentally at its heart this is a humanitarian intervention by the French. The Islamists who took over Northern Mali have been imposing a severe, austere form of Islam demanding "No cigarettes, no CDs, no radios, no cameras, no jewelry" and beating those who disobey the rules. Men and women have to sit in separate areas in buses. With Sharia being more strictly enforced with increasing number of amputations despite opposition from the local population.[1] Much of the population of the North had already fled to the south with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees saying 200,000 have fled since January 2012.[2] Those who have, like Moussa from Timbuktu, clearly welcome the intervention, he told a French radio station “We have been suffocating and [France] has given us a breath of oxygen. We are ready to fly Malian and French flags alongside each other.”[3]

[1] Mben, Paul Hyacinthe, ‘A Trip Through Hell Daily Life in Islamist Northern Mali’, Spiegel Online, 29 October 2012, http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/a-trip-through-hell-daily-life-in-islamist-controlled-north-mali-a-864014.html

[2] Caux, Helene, ‘IDPs struggle to survive after escaping fighting in northern Mali’, UNHCR, 12 December 2012, http://www.unhcr.org/50c8d4399.html

[3] Bamat, Joseph, ‘Mali-based Islamists pledge attacks on French soil’, France 24, 14 January 2013, http://www.france24.com/en/20130114-mali-france-intervention-terrorist-attacks

Ban Ki Moon has also stated that “I am profoundly aware that if a military intervention in the north is not well conceived and executed, it could worsen an already fragile humanitarian situation and also result in severe human rights abuses”[1] so French military intervention is not necessarily the right course to take if the intention is to be helping the people of northern Mali. Equally we can ask if this will really end the civil war? Mali has suffered from several Tuareg rebellions in the past. In particular there was a civil war between 1990 and 1996[2] which has had over a decade of sporadic peace negotiations while a cease fire held. So while outside intervention may end the civil war unless the French propose to remain in place for decades or work instead on a diplomatic solution in the long run Mali will be no better off.

[1] Tisdall, Simon, ‘UN urges caution over military intervention in Mali’, guardian.co.uk, 29 November 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/29/un-caution-military-intervention-mali

[2] Humphreys, Macartan, and Mohamed, Habaye ag, ‘Senegal and Mali’, January 2003, http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/papers1/sen_mali.pdf pp.19-28

This intervention is not all about terrorism and a humanitarian desire to end a civil war. France does have a stake in the conflict and a reason to deploy military forces. There are 6,000 French citizens living in Mali who are obviously at risk to a rebel advance; even without a full scale intervention France would almost certainly have had to deploy forces to protect an evacuation. Already there are seven French citizens being held hostage in Mali and rescuing them is one of the three main objectives for the French intervention.[1]

[1] Welsh, Jennifer, ‘Sending soldiers to Mali may be the only solution’, The Globe and Mail, 14 January 2012, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/why-france-couldnt-wait-for-a-regional-solution-in-mali/article7318783/

This might be an excuse to send a few soldiers to help evacuation and possibly a commando raid to free hostages but it is not a reason for all out intervention. If it was such a justification then in almost any conflict some state would have just cause to intervene because some of their citizens were in danger.

“France has answered… a request for assistance issued by the interim president of the Republic of Mali”. France is therefore not coming in uninvited. Mali’s President Traore directly appealed to French President Hollande to provide “French military assistance against these terrorist groups” that have “attacked our front lines of defense”.[1] As the former colonial power in much of West Africa, including Mali, France is the obvious country to turn to for help. As a result of this colonial past Mali is a member of the French led Organisation internationale de la Francophonie.[2] Mali is therefore fully within its sovereign rights to ask for assistance and Hollande is right to agree to provide it.  

[1] Lynch, Colum, ‘France’s U.N. envoy: French military intervention in Mali is open ended’, Foreign Policy Turtle Bay, 11 January 2013, http://turtlebay.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/01/11/france_s_un_envoy_french_military_intervention_in_mali_is_open_ended

[2] ‘Welcome to the International Organisation of La Francophonie’s official website’ http://www.francophonie.org/English.html

Mali should be asking for diplomatic help to resolve the crisis not asking for a military force. France meanwhile should not be accepting a request from an unelected President to attack his own people. A request to intervene in a country does not make that intervention legitimate it simply provides a fig leaf to protect France from accusations of colonialism.

While it was Tuareg separatists who first sparked the insurrection wanting to split Mali but now the North has been taken over by Islamists and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb presenting a terrorist threat that cannot be ignored. France’s Defence minister Jean-Yves Le Drian says "France's goal is to lead a relentless struggle against terrorist groups," and that "We have to eradicate this terrorism".[1] The United States was already clearly worried about Mali becoming a center of terrorism having on the 7^th December designated the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa a terrorist organisation while other groups involved in Mali such as al-Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb were already designated as such. The State department highlights several terrorist attacks the group has conducted such as “a March 2012 suicide attack on a police base in Tamanrasset, Algeria, which wounded 23 people”.[2]

[1] CNN Staff, ‘France determined to ‘eradicate’ terrorism in Mali, official says’, CNN, 13 January 2013, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/13/world/africa/mali-military-offensive/index.html

[2] Office of the Spokesperson, ‘Terrorist Designations of the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa, Hamad el Khairy, and Ahmed el Tilemsi’, U.S. Department of State, 7 December 2012, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/12/201660.htm

If terrorism is the concern then the French intervening is one of the worst possible options. Having France fighting in Mali may well result in the internationalization of the conflict bringing in jihadists.[1] Already the islamists are saying the conflict is a holy war as “France has attacked Islam” and they will in response “strike at the heart of France”.[2]

[1] Welsh, Jennifer, ‘Sending soldiers to Mali may be the only solution’, The Globe and Mail, 14 January 2012, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/why-france-couldnt-wait-for-a-regional-solution-in-mali/article7318783/

[2] Bamat, Joseph, ‘Mali-based Islamists pledge attacks on French soil’, France 24, 14 January 2013, http://www.france24.com/en/20130114-mali-france-intervention-terrorist-attacks

Fundamentally at its heart this is a humanitarian intervention by the French. The Islamists who took over Northern Mali have been imposing a severe, austere form of Islam demanding "No cigarettes, no CDs, no radios, no cameras, no jewelry" and beating those who disobey the rules. Men and women have to sit in separate areas in buses. With Sharia being more strictly enforced with increasing number of amputations despite opposition from the local population.[1] Much of the population of the North had already fled to the south with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees saying 200,000 have fled since January 2012.[2] Those who have, like Moussa from Timbuktu, clearly welcome the intervention, he told a French radio station “We have been suffocating and [France] has given us a breath of oxygen. We are ready to fly Malian and French flags alongside each other.”[3]

[1] Mben, Paul Hyacinthe, ‘A Trip Through Hell Daily Life in Islamist Northern Mali’, Spiegel Online, 29 October 2012, http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/a-trip-through-hell-daily-life-in-islamist-controlled-north-mali-a-864014.html

[2] Caux, Helene, ‘IDPs struggle to survive after escaping fighting in northern Mali’, UNHCR, 12 December 2012, http://www.unhcr.org/50c8d4399.html

[3] Bamat, Joseph, ‘Mali-based Islamists pledge attacks on French soil’, France 24, 14 January 2013, http://www.france24.com/en/20130114-mali-france-intervention-terrorist-attacks

Ban Ki Moon has also stated that “I am profoundly aware that if a military intervention in the north is not well conceived and executed, it could worsen an already fragile humanitarian situation and also result in severe human rights abuses”[1] so French military intervention is not necessarily the right course to take if the intention is to be helping the people of northern Mali. Equally we can ask if this will really end the civil war? Mali has suffered from several Tuareg rebellions in the past. In particular there was a civil war between 1990 and 1996[2] which has had over a decade of sporadic peace negotiations while a cease fire held. So while outside intervention may end the civil war unless the French propose to remain in place for decades or work instead on a diplomatic solution in the long run Mali will be no better off.

[1] Tisdall, Simon, ‘UN urges caution over military intervention in Mali’, guardian.co.uk, 29 November 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/29/un-caution-military-intervention-mali

[2] Humphreys, Macartan, and Mohamed, Habaye ag, ‘Senegal and Mali’, January 2003, http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/papers1/sen_mali.pdf pp.19-28

This intervention is not all about terrorism and a humanitarian desire to end a civil war. France does have a stake in the conflict and a reason to deploy military forces. There are 6,000 French citizens living in Mali who are obviously at risk to a rebel advance; even without a full scale intervention France would almost certainly have had to deploy forces to protect an evacuation. Already there are seven French citizens being held hostage in Mali and rescuing them is one of the three main objectives for the French intervention.[1]

[1] Welsh, Jennifer, ‘Sending soldiers to Mali may be the only solution’, The Globe and Mail, 14 January 2012, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/why-france-couldnt-wait-for-a-regional-solution-in-mali/article7318783/

This might be an excuse to send a few soldiers to help evacuation and possibly a commando raid to free hostages but it is not a reason for all out intervention. If it was such a justification then in almost any conflict some state would have just cause to intervene because some of their citizens were in danger.

Western nations should clearly not be interfering in African affairs. Not only is this conflict outside of NATO’s remit but it is internal to an individual African state rather than a war between states. By intervening France and other nations are taking part in a civil war in which they are aiding a government that was placed in office by a military coup in March 2012 so does not have a democratic mandate.[1]

This intervention is an example of France once more playing the role of gendarme and considering that it has some kind of divine right to intervene in Africa.[2] This war is of course in large part France’s fault in the first place; it is trying to hold together a nation that should be split in two as a result of artificial colonial borders that fan conflict by dividing communities.[3] In this case France is intervening to deny a legitimate people’s, the Tuareg, their right to self-determination. The Tuaregs are divided between Algeria, Kibya, Mali, and Niger but without a majority in any.[4] The Turegs when they took control of Azawad made a declaration of independence.[5] While this has not been recognised this simply shows how existing states are worried about accepting the logic of self-determination when they themselves have groups that may want independence.

[1] Felix, Bate, ‘Mali junta sees civilian government “in days”’, Reuters, 8 April 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/08/us-mali-idUSBRE8350MO20120408

[2] Diop, Boubacar Boris, ‘La Vie en %$!’, Foreign Policy, July/August 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/06/21/la_vie_en

[3] Zachary, G. Pascal, ‘African Needs a New Map’, Foreign Policy, 28 April 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/04/28/africa_needs_a_new_map

[4] 10% in Mali ‘Mali’ The World Factbook, CIA, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ml.html 9.3% in Niger ‘Niger’, The World Factbook, CIA, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ng.html

[5] Fessy, Thomas, ‘Mali Tuareg rebels declare independence in the north’, BBC News, 6 April 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17635437

Self-determination should first be internal rather than external.[1] In other words self-determination means autonomy within the existing state not a new state unless there is no other way of resolving the conflict. In Mali therefore the rebels need to put down their weapons and accept the authority of the central government, whose will the French and others are trying to enforce. It is clear that the people of northern Mali would prefer a solution within the state of Mali as half the population has fled to the south[2] and Ansar Dine and MNLA have walked back their declaration of independence promising “respect for Mali's national unity and territorial integrity” in December.[3]

[1] “Reference re Secession of Quebec”, Supreme Court of Canada, 1998, 2 S.C.R. 217, http://scc.lexum.org/en/1998/1998scr2-217/1998scr2-217.html

[2] Fessy, Thomas, ‘Mali Tuareg rebels declare independence in the north’, BBC News, 6 April 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17635437

[3] Agencies, ‘Mali rebels agree to respect ‘national unity’, AlJazeera, 5 December 2012, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/12/201212420515159568.html

The United Nations charter is quite clear that it should be African Nations leading the way in this conflict. It says “The Security Council shall encourage the development of pacific settlement of local disputes through such regional arrangements or by such regional agencies”[1] and since there are several African Security Organisations there is little reason why these could not have taken the lead. The African Union in particular has undertaken interventions in similar situations before; notably in Somalia.[2] This has been recognised right up until the French intervened and the UN Security Council resolution in December mandated for “the deployment of an African-led mission to support efforts by national authorities to recover the north.”[3]

[1] Article 52, http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter8.shtml

[2] Jowell, Marco, ‘Kenya: Intervening in Somalia – Risky Business With No End in Sight’, All Africa, 17 January 2012, http://allafrica.com/stories/201201170950.html?page=2

[3] Security Council 6898^th meeting, ‘Security Council authorizes deployment of African-led international support mission in Mali for initial year-long period’, United Nations, Resolution 2085, 20 December 2012, http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/sc10870.doc.htm

This is ignoring both that African nations are taking a leading role in this intervention and that it is them who have asked for intervention by western states.

First of All Nigeria is going to send 600 troops, Senegal, Burkina Faso, and Togo 500 each, and Benin 300. These numbers far outweigh the 550 being sent by France and logistical support provided by other countries such as the UK and US.[1] It can therefore be said that this is an African mission.

Secondly the resolution in December did call for “coordination with the European Union and other partners”. [2] ECOWAS had already in December called for the United Nations to intervene[3] and “thanks the French Government for its initiatives to support Mali.”[4]

[1] ‘Mali: France pledges ‘short’ campaign against Islamists’, BBC News, 14 January 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21007517

[2] Security Council 6898th meeting, ‘Security Council authorizes deployment of African-led international support mission in Mali for initial year-long period’, United Nations, Resolution 2085, 20 December 2012, http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/sc10870.doc.htm

[3] AP, ‘ECOWAS calls for UN-backed intervention to reclaim north’, France 24, 7 August 2012, http://www.france24.com/en/20120707-mali-ecowas-tuareg-al-qaeda-rebels

[4] Ouédraogo, Kadre Desiré,  ‘Statement of the President of the ECOWAS Commission on the Situation in Mali’, Reliefweb, 12 January 2013, http://reliefweb.int/report/mali/statement-president-ecowas-commission-situation-mali

Western states seem to so often be willing to get involved in conflicts without thinking about how to get out of them. Interventions are difficult operations that need a lot of planning and the United Nations has previously said that in the case of Mali "Nothing could be done before September, October," and there should be diplomatic talks and a rebuilding of the Malian army first.[1] Unless there is a clear exit plan then there is the risk that the conflict in Mali will turn into a Quagmire from which French and other Western forces cannot easily extradite themselves.

The conflict has not resulted in many French casualties although they did have a helicopter shot down.[2] However there is still a question of how long France will have to keep a military presence in the country.  The French initially said they would be pulling troops out in March;[3] the first troops did not leave until May. They said they would only have 1000 there by the end of the year[4] but in January 2014 still had 2500.[5]

[1] Irish, John, ‘No military intervention in Mali before September: U.N. peacekeeping chief’, Reuters, 5 December 2012, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/12/05/us-mali-un-idUSBRE8B415120121205

[2] Chrisafis, Angelique, ‘Mali: high stakes in ‘Hollande’s war’’, The Guardian, 13 January 2013, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/13/mali-high-stakes-francois-hollande?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

[3] Schofield, Hugh, ‘France action in Mali is real war, says Le Drian’, BBC News, 6 February 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21348335

[4] BBC News, ‘Mali crisis: French troops begin withdrawal’, 9 April 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22079290

[5] Al Jazeera Staff, ‘Interactive: Mali Speaks’, Al Jazeera, 21 January 2013, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2013/01/201312113451635182.html

The French have rejected any parallel with Afghanistan and other quagmires. Fabius, France’s Foreign Minister, has said that "Later on, we can come as back-up, but we have no intention of staying forever,"[1] the handover may be slower than anticipated but there is no evidence the French will be in Mali for an extended period.

[1] ‘Mali: France pledges ‘short’ campaign against Islamists’, BBC News, 14 January 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21007517