by Richard Chidowore
The Angolan peace process, which stalled when Unita leader Jonas Savimbi disputed the September 1992 election results – declared free and fair by international observers – and plunged the country back to war, has been revived after Savimbi finally admitted that be lost the elections.
‘We accept the results of the elections … the whole package,” Savimbi told the world on 18 May, more than two-and-half years after he lost the ballot. Two weeks earlier, in the Zambian capital, Lusaka, Savimbi declared of Jose Eduardo dos Santos, “be is President of my country and therefore my president. I will give him my best support in bringing peace to our country.”
The two leaders, who met on 6 May 1995 for the first time in three years, gave hopes of ending a 20- year-old war which has left one million Angolans dead or injured, and paralysed the country’s economic life.
The talks, which were aimed at consolidating the political conditions for the full implementation of the Lusaka Protocol, have diminished suspicions that both sides were preparing for further conflict. The protocol provides for the demobilization of the rival armies and the formation of a new, joint national defence force under UN supervision.
The two leaders’ meeting was also an attempt to create conditions conducive to the successful deployment of the UN peacekeeping troops and accomplishment of its tasks.
Southern African leaders, meeting at the World Social Summit in South Africa a few days later, said they wanted to see another meeting between the two leaders to continue to work jointly to bring peace to Angola. “We look forward to their continuing to interact and to ensure … the unfolding of the peace process,” said the Frontline States Chairman, Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe.
Now that President dos Santos and Savimbi have lent their weight to the peace process, the UN isexpected to accelerate the deployment of some 7 600 international soldiers – drawn from Zimbabwe, Brazil, Bangladesh, India, Romania and Uruguay – to monitor the implementation of the Lusaka Accord. Cooperation between Angolan government forces and Unita soldiers is expected to facilitate the work of peacekeepers.
The Security Council agreed in February to the deployment of the UN’s third mission to Angola –
UN Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM Ill) – authorizing the immediate departure of logistical
units but making the deployment of infantry contingent on a total cessation of hostilities between the warring Angolan sides.
The infantry battalions will join the UN support service troops, among them medics, signalmen and quartermasters, drawn from Britain, Portugal, Romania and Argentina who are already in Angola. The troops are expected to be in Angola for two years, although national units would be rotated. The deployment of the blue helmets, originally scheduled for May, is imperative in this country where although the two sides have generally respected the ceasefire, government and Unita troops have not withdrawn from battle-posts.
What is remarkable about the recent changes in Angola is the events preceding the meeting between Dos Santos and Savimbi, particularly the eighth Unita congress in February. The Unita congress was held in Bail undo, north of Huambo, was largely an abrogation of the peace process.
Savimbi repeatedly said that he had no faith in the Lusaka deal, that the accord was a pack of lies with no value to Angola and that he still had the resources to fight on. He told the congress that Unita was split over the accord and that his generals opposed it.
Almost all those associated with the Lusaka deal were sacked at the Bailundo Congress. Eugenio
Ngolo Manuvakola who was in charge of the last stages of the negotiations, and signed the Protocol on Savimbi’s behalf was sacked as Unita Secretary General and replaced by Paulo Lukarnbo Gato.
Jorge Valentim, spokesperson for Unita during most of the negotiations.,lost his post as Information Secretary. The more conservative leadership installed by Savimbi is reportedly less flexible and more suspicious of the MPLA than its predecessors.
Well-informed analysts say that Savimbi’s later change of attitude is due to pressure from his
rightwing friends in the United States who have told him to settle. Successive US administrations and apartheid South Africa’s support for Unita during the war of destabilization is well documented and widely known. This support has waned following the creation of a democratic South Africa and a renewed urge for peace in southern Africa.
Another viewpoint is that, “Savimbi bas finally realised that the only way in which he will effectively care for the people of his country – his ultimate goal – is through compromise … as a Luanda-based diplomat recently said.
Against this backdrop, a period of peace in Angola seems more likely. To show its commitment to peace, the Angolan government freed more than I 00 Unita troops a few days after the Lusaka meeting.
With the first solid signs of peace in Angola, some of the more critical and pressing problems which hitherto had been neglected came into focus. After the guns fall silent, Angola faces the mammoth tasks of resettling and rehabilitating millions of its people displaced or forced to seek refuge in neighbouring countries by two decades of war.
One of the major hurdles to be overcome would be the demobilization of soldiers, numbering at least 200,000 on each side, and among whom there are many who have spent most of their lives on the battlefronts.
If peace 1s achieved in Angola, the process would close the chapter on internal strife in southern Africa so that efforts could be directed toward improving people’s living standards and regional integration.
The Southern African Development Community (SADC) Executive Secretary. Dr. Kaire Mbuende, alluded to the peace process saying. “Economic development cannot take place in an insecure environment, and now is the time to consolidate democracy and peace in southern Africa.
There are also challenges related to the removal of landmines which were indiscriminately planted in some rural areas during the war of destabilization. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) estimate that there are 10 million landmines in Angola.
Apart from hampering the return of displaced persons, landmines also have a significant impact on aspects of Angola’s economy, particularly in the rural areas. Thousands of acres of farmland, pasture and forest, thousands of kilometres of riverbanks are unusable, and many kilometres of roads are dangerous.
For example, the fertile Mavinga valley in Cuando Cubango Province of southeast Angola is largely abandoned because of the large number of mines laid there by Unita and the South African Defence Forces (SADF).
Mines specialist Nicholas Nobbs says clearing the Angolan countryside for people to return to their homes and resume agricultural activity is top priority. But he adds that his crew is not optimistic about the length of time it will take to clear Cuito.
Nobbs, who heads a mine-clearing operation in the town for Halo Trust – a private British agency –
recalls that: “It took Poland 30 years to clear their mines, with thousands of workers, and they still have accidents. Here, we are working with limited numbers, and we find mines where we least expect them.”
The sequel of landmines poses a two·fold need in post·war peacetime. First, costly financing and the expertise necessary for the removal of landmines should be secured. Second, the dilemma facing the victims is that the country cannot cope with the growing demand of rehabilitation.
Several thousands artificial limbs are required each year and the demand will continue to rise until a thorough cleaning of landmines is achieved.
Angola can only produce a little more than l 000 artificial limbs each year due to lack of necessary resources. This is insufficient in a country where there are more than 55 000 landmines amputees. About three million Angolans were displaced from their homes by the ·war since independence in 1975.
Because of the destruction caused to the economy some of the refugees are reluctant to return to their economically depressed areas of origin because they have found jobs or better living conditions elsewhere.
The UNHCR representative in Angola, Hope Hanlan, once remarked about refugees: “We cannot uproot families who at present have a roof over their heads, access to health and educational facilities and a means of earning a livelihood and bring them back to insecure, heavily-mined areas with no infrastructure to receive them.”
Peace should bring about the much-needed investment and help rehabilitate the shattered infrastructure and stabilize the economy of this impoverished but fertile land whose vast petroleum and diamond riches were depleted by the war.
The problems facing Angola (as well as Mozambique) are so massive that SADC recently appealed to international donors to consider special assistance to both countries “in reconstructing their national economics following the end of the wars.”
With the peace process now seemingly irreversible in Angola, the potential for a quick turnaround is perhaps greater due to the existing commercial infrastructure for resource development. There is, therefore, the need for the international community to shift their assistance from just relief operations to trade and investrnent. (SARDC)
