In the past, responsible members of the international community have shaped an image and practice of good governance, respect for human rights and democracy. They have taken a firm stand on these issues, particularly when dealing with authoritarian leaders and their followers.
This has in many cases limited authoritarian, populist and militarist governments from completely ignoring pressure for reform in exchange for funding and favorable deals.
This attitude gave hope to many citizens struggling to have a meaningful and meaningful vote.
But today, countries and institutions that were once beacons of hope now face dilemmas that weaken their role as international standards of best practice and good governance.
Russia-Ukraine conflict
Take, for example, the Russia-Ukraine conflict compared to other conflicts around the world.
When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, democratic countries – with a few notable exceptions – provided a strong and targeted response that included public denunciations of the invasion, war crimes linked to the invasion, and Russia’s manipulation of West African states through the military group Wagner.
The International Criminal Court was engaged in an expedited investigation leading up to the 2013 Maidan protests, and as a result of the investigation, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
But the pro-democracy side of the international community has been largely silent on the flagrant conflicts in Ethiopia, Myanmar and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where state abuses and human rights abuses are being committed and where out-of-control soldiers and paramilitaries are running amok.
Why is this happening;
Perhaps it’s because these conflicts are complex and protracted, while “simpler” conflicts are easier to sell to domestic audiences. This is a shame as these conflicts require the intervention of the global community as they claim hundreds of thousands of lives in Africa and elsewhere.
SADC failure
More closely, disagreement between standards and practice remains the modus operandi between regional bodies such as SADC and powerful countries such as South Africa.
South Africa recently made a partially successful application to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding the Israel/Palestine conflict. South Africa has argued that Israel’s bombing and siege of Gaza directly contravenes the United Nations Genocide Convention.
The ICJ responded by ordering Israel to take all necessary measures to prevent acts of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
The court did not rule that Israel should end the war against Hamas and called on the organization to release Israeli hostages.
While South Africa has enjoyed the cheers that have flowed in from some quarters following the decision, it has been strangely silent on issues closer to home.
For example, in 2023, Zimbabwe held a vicious election marred by multiple human rights abuses, a widespread post-election government crackdown on opposition leaders, and a complete disregard for citizens who decided to vote.
The elections were criticized by several observer missions, including one from SADC. However, the SADC troika failed to support its observer mission’s condemnation of the way the poll was conducted.
In addition, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa attended the inauguration of President Emmerson Mnangagwa and congratulated him on his “re-election”.
How AU allows abuses
South Africa is just one example of a member state operating in a regional body whose silence on gross human rights abuses in the region allows individual SADC countries to turn a blind eye to what is happening in their own backyard.
For example, since 2021, the Cabo Delgado region of Mozambique has experienced violent conflict at the hands of Al-Shabaab-affiliated rebels as well as the Mozambican Defense Forces.
Although several countries have tried to help end the conflict by providing armed forces to support the Mozambican army, the regional body has been slow to publish findings of an investigation into human rights abuses committed by soldiers deployed to protect civilians in Cabo Delgado .
At the 2023 Luanda Summit, SADC countries continued to remain silent on abuses by their troops or provide plans to address these abuses.
With these double standards and failures to protect human rights and democratic institutions, there is less and less reason why authoritarians should feel the pressure to reform.
Perfect excuse
Double standards are not uncommon in the international community.
However, in recent years, the critical problem with the double standards in such massive conflicts and demonstrations of human rights violations is that they give militarized and authoritarian regimes the perfect excuse to freely hold their citizens hostage.
These repressive regimes are less willing to negotiate and reform when faced with diplomatic and economic pressure from the international community, as demonstrated by the responses of the coups in West Africa.
This is of particular concern in Africa as it faces a year in which many civilians will fight for their right to vote in free and fair elections.
Already, the consequences of these blatant double standards are being seen.
Mali – after a coup – postponed its presidential elections, as did Senegal. Fragile democracies such as those of Somaliland and Tunisia face massive crackdowns on activists and opposition party leaders and face the risk of stolen elections.
What we see is a scenario where the state of affairs in the international community provides the perfect conditions that allow authoritarians, populists and fascists to survive and thrive.
It’s a scary world we’re moving into, and only a sober approach to global conflicts will restore the international community’s moral high ground and its usefulness as a supporting force for citizens fighting for their right to vote.
We are where we are right now because of people and leaders who disrespected the hard won world peace.
We can be where we want to be with people and leaders who do not tolerate the high cost of conflict in the lives of those who continue to fight for their right to have a vote that makes a difference. DM
Rutendo Nyaku is a Machel-Mandela Fellow at The Brenthurst Foundation.