1- On 6/8/2008, a military coup was announced in Mauritania, carried out by the army led by the head of the Republican Guard, General Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, against the President of the Republic, Sidi Mohamed Ould Cheikh Abdallahi, and his Prime Minister, Yahya Ould Ahmed El Waghef. This occurred 16 months after the elections the military allowed in March 2007, and less than two years after the 2005 coup against Maaouya Ould Taya, which saw the military take power under Colonel Ely Ould Mohamed Vall, who fulfilled his promise to hand over power to an elected government. What is the reality of this coup and the motivation behind it?
The Answer: The colonialist France overpowered the Muslims in Mauritania after fierce resistance in 1920, when France declared it a French colony. In 1946, they declared it an overseas province belonging to France, and these colonialists effectively remained until 1960, when they granted it nominal independence. However, they maintained control over its affairs, established its army according to their own creed, and trained officers according to their culture. Coups began in 1978 against the first president appointed by the French, Moktar Ould Daddah. A series of five successful coups have occurred to date, in addition to nine attempted coups within a thirty-year period.
The latest coup was led by General Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz after President Ould Cheikh Abdallahi issued a decree dismissing the General from the leadership of the Republican Guard, as well as dismissing the Chief of Staff, Ould Ghazouani, and the commander of the Gendarmerie. It is noteworthy that President Ould Cheikh Abdallahi was the one who promoted these individuals from the rank of Colonel to General. This indicates he was either satisfied with them, living under their pressure, or seeking to appease them through promotion to win their loyalty—the latter being the most likely.
Consequently, it is surprising that he would turn around and dismiss the army leadership so easily and quickly! Especially considering they were the ones holding power, while he was a newly elected president—the first to come through elections. It seems he believed he had become powerful enough to do so, assuming he had local and international support due to the so-called democratic process and that France could not encourage officers to stage a coup, particularly as he felt he had American support.
The initial French response, via Foreign Ministry spokesperson Romain Nadal, was: "We are in constant contact with our embassy in Nouakchott and are following the situation with great interest in coordination with all our partners." He added that it was too early to describe the situation. France was the first country to announce the occurrence of a coup in Mauritania, and the first ambassador received by the coup leader was the French ambassador. This indicates France’s prior knowledge of the coup. News reports indicated that France knew of the coup at least two hours before it happened.
As for the American response, via the State Department, it was a condemnation of the coup, calling on the world to condemn it, welcoming the condemnation by the European Commission and the African Union, and demanding the release of the elected President Ould Cheikh Abdallahi and his Prime Minister Yahya Ould Ahmed and the immediate restoration of the elected government. It also announced the suspension of its non-humanitarian aid to Mauritania.
However, a day later, the French Presidency issued a statement in its capacity as the President of the European Union, stating that the Presidency of the EU Council condemns with all firmness the coup carried out by General Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz in Mauritania. It appears this condemnation came late and was not in the name of France specifically, but in the name of the European Union, which displays a policy of supporting elections and democracy as a general intellectual line that differs from the individual positions of its member states. Especially after America’s condemnation and its demand for everyone to follow suit, Europe could not say it supported the coup, as that would contradict the democracy it touts.
Nothing was issued by Britain, its press, or its media, indicating that Britain is not bothered by the coup process; it neither condemned nor supported it, nor promoted for or against it, so as not to be embarrassed by appearing to be against democracy and with the coup.
This Mauritanian coup occurred after a dispute between the army and the President and his Prime Minister. The army created unrest when they asked members of Parliament and the Senate to resign from the President's ruling party, known by the acronym Adel. Consequently, 48 members resigned from this party on 5/8/2008. Following this, the President dismissed the army leaders and their head, the leader of the latest coup, Ould Abdel Aziz. The army leaders then carried out the coup, rejecting the dismissal decisions and declaring them null in their first statement. The leader of the coup, Ould Abdel Aziz, stated to Al Jazeera today, 9/8/2008, that the coup was a reaction to the failed measures of the former president. Meanwhile, the spokesperson for the former presidency, Abdoullah Mamadou Ba, said: "The military saw the president as a puppet, and when the opposite became clear to them, they sowed confusion within the ruling party. When the president tried to form a new majority with other parties, the officers moved the military machine."
The parliamentary crisis began on 30/6/2008 when MPs accused the government of failure and demanded a vote of no confidence. On 1/7/2008, reports emerged stating that France was behind the movement of these parliamentarians and that it was dissatisfied with the performance of the government and the presidency. Several reasons were cited for France's dissatisfaction, including the release of Muslim prisoners associated with the Salafi movement, allowing the establishment of a party representing those considered Islamists, the President showing religious inclinations by establishing a mosque in the Republican Palace, and his sensitivity toward relations with the Jewish state, suggesting he would put this relationship to a public referendum to terminate it. Additionally, he allowed an increased American presence in Mauritania, which is the most prominent factor.
In conclusion, it can be said based on the aforementioned that new political trends began to emerge from the President that France did not approve of, and these trends encouraged the officers to overthrow him. America was satisfied with his leanings against the French presence and his permission for America to increase its presence in Mauritania as a prelude to removing French influence and replacing it with American presence. He also wanted to rid himself of the army's authority and bring in officers he could control, removing those loyal to France.
2- What prompted Georgia to initiate the attack on South Ossetia? Did it not expect a strong reaction from Russia? Where does this war lead?
The Answer: It is clear that America is the one who ignited the fuse of war in Georgia, as the Georgian forces that invaded South Ossetia could not have carried out such a major action without a green light from the Americans.
The Georgian attack was planned and a surprise to the Russians; it may be the beginning of a long war in which Caucasians—Georgians and Ossetians alike—will be the primary fuel. Russia will not remain silent about this attack because silence would destroy its prestige. Furthermore, it will not concede Georgia's sovereignty over South Ossetia, especially since most of its seventy thousand inhabitants are Russians or Russian loyalists holding Russian passports, and they are considered a natural extension of North Ossetia, which belongs to Russia.
Georgia will not easily give up South Ossetia because it is part of its territory according to official and international maps. On the other hand, it wants revenge against the Ossetians who defeated Georgia in the 1992 war and seceded with Russian support for the past sixteen years. It is likely that the war will also spread to the Abkhazia region, which is larger than South Ossetia in terms of area and population and seceded from Georgia in the same year and under the same circumstances.
Initial American statements after the outbreak of fighting indeed indicate that America stands by Georgia. State Department spokesperson Gonzalo Gallegos said: "We are in contact with senior officials in Russia and Georgia," adding: "We call on Moscow to exercise pressure on the de facto leaders in South Ossetia to stop the fire," thereby considering the separatist leaders as de facto leaders. In another statement, an American official said that the solution to the South Ossetian problem must be based on the territorial integrity of Georgia, indicating that South Ossetia should be annexed to Georgia.
As for Russia, after the independence and secession of Kosovo from Serbia, it threatened that its response would be the independence and secession of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia. Some observers believe that Georgia's entry into NATO is contingent upon solving the problem of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It seems Georgian President Saakashvili is rushing matters and racing against time to join the alliance. He embarked on this war leaning on American promises to rid himself of Russian interference in his state's internal affairs and to rise to the level of countries like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, which completely rid themselves of Russian influence. Consequently, it is not expected that the Russian and Georgian sides will reach a final solution, especially since the Georgians are tired of waiting, while the Russians consider the issue part of their regional sphere and cannot imagine abandoning the separatists. Therefore, the most that can be expected in terms of solutions is something closer to a "warrior's rest" (truce) rather than a final settlement.
America will be the primary beneficiary of this war and has nothing to lose, as it will at least keep this problem as a thorn in Russia's side, draining much of its energy and preoccupying it for a long time at the expense of other issues.
10 Sha'ban 1429 AH 09/08/2008 CE