French President Emmanuel Macron lunches with French troops during his visit to France's Barkhane counter-terrorism operation in Africa's Sahel region in Gao, northern Mali, 19 May 2017, his first trip outside Europe since his inauguration on 14 May 2017. Pool/Press Association. All rights reserved.The Sahel
region took centre stage last week as African leaders met at the regional
Dakar International Forum on Peace and Security to discuss growing lawlessness
along its arc. Consequently, Senegalese President Macky Sall on Monday called for a unified, comprehensive
military response that leaves no room for Africa’s terror groups
to hide. While such a response has been welcomed with open arms, concerns
have been expressed over the possible sidelining of human rights. Fears abound
that without adequate safeguards, any new military intervention will only
worsen the bloodshed.

It is not
difficult to see why a military option has so much appeal as the best approach
to resolve the security issues in an increasingly volatile region. Since Libya
descended into civil war in 2011, Islamists have overrun parts of northern Mali
to the east, and Boko Haram has been persistent in its efforts to secure a
foothold at the heart of the region in northern Nigeria. To the south,
militants threaten the Sahel from Congo, Central African Republic and South
Sudan. At the same time, partially as a result of the militants’ advances, a
humanitarian crisis is unfolding. This year, at least 11
million are facing a major food crisis. The UN has called for efforts to break
the cycle of food crises, citing land degradation, population displacement, and
ongoing political instability as the pillars of Sahel’s hardship. This year, at least 11 million
are facing a major food crisis.

The Dakar
peace forum comes on the heels of the launch of the G5 Sahel force in
July, a military initiative working across Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania
and Niger to root out jihadist groups in the region. The newest joint
international force in the world, the G5 Sahel envisions up to 5,000 military,
police and civilian troops by March 2018. As part of a greater strategic push
for intensified cooperation with the Sahel zone, the EU pledged to support the force with $50 million
in funding. Brussels hopes that the migration streams from the region will be
reduced when the underlying causes for regional instability are assertively
tackled. Added to the 4,000 French troops already deployed across the Sahel,
one could be optimistic about the force’s capacity to target and eliminate
terrorist hotspots across the Sahel.

However,
the hopeful rhetoric of European and Sahel leaders should be matched with an
equal sense of caution. While focus is placed on gathering the necessary funds
and troops, the mission crucially overlooks human rights protection as an
important aspect in appeasing the region. And if history is a lesson, without a
robust human rights framework, international missions are more likely to add to, rather than
prevent, violence.

Terrorism is only the topsoil

The G5
Force is unlikely to be an exception. So earlier this month, the UN Assistant
Secretary-General for Human Rights Andrew Gilmour visited Mali with the express
purpose of discussing a human rights compliance mechanism for the Sahel Force.
He described respect for human rights as a
“cornerstone” in the fight against terrorism. He is right to stress this point:
sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers throughout Africa has been well-documented, leading the UN Security
Council to adopt a resolution targeting UN peacekeepers in
March last year.

The UN
Security Council called on the G5 Sahel force to implement a
gender perspective in fulfilling strategic operations, citing the role women
play in preventing conflict and pursuing peace-building projects. Though
participants of this week’s conference stressed a universal respect for human
rights and international law, no specific provisions have been put in place to
ensure compliance. But within a new and poorly organised international force, it is
unclear how these provisions would be implemented even once articulated.

Simply
put, a military-focused approach will not solve broader governance issues
relating to civil liberties and human rights. This is especially true when the
military is part of the problem. In Mali, this is more often the case than not.
Government troops have committed grievous human rights violations, with
extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, torture and arbitrary arrests reported in recent years. Earlier this
year, Burkinabe soldiers allegedly burned property and beat at least 70 men
accused of supporting a local Islamist group.
 Adequate control of G5 forces is
furthermore hindered by the complexity of fractured societies as the
operational environment. Earlier this year, Burkinabe soldiers allegedly burned property and beat
at least 70 men accused of supporting a local Islamist group.


Conflicts
in the region are the result of a “sedimentation of problems”, and terrorism is only the
topsoil. Issues of state legitimacy, violent offences by security forces and
corruption contribute to pervasive tensions within local populations. It is
unclear how the G5 hopes to address these concerns. Given how local populations
are routinely victims of arbitrary arrests and other abuses of troops, the
force’s ability to elicit trust from locals is severely limited.

Human
rights violations are frequently justified in the name of fighting terrorism,
thereby undermining the legitimacy of the troops and the governments they
represent. Rather than alleviating the problem, many young people reportedly join rebel groups in reaction
to treatment at the hands of government forces.

Mauritania

The risk
of further violence is especially high given the involvement of partners that
are likely to use Sahel Force participation to cement their power. Mauritania
is a key example: President Abdel Aziz has been trying to assert his grip over
the country in a controversial referendum where voting for changing
Mauritania’s flag was combined with abolishing the nation’s
senate. The move laid the groundwork for Abdel Aziz to unlawfully extend his stay in office
indefinitely. Highly unpopular, Aziz could be tempted to employ his country’s
G5 military contingent to crack down on civil unrest in the name of maintaining
regional stability. The effect will be counter-productive, as this will likely
fuel anti-establishment sentiment and increase the risk for religious
radicalization.

The
European countries backing the G5 Force have a responsibility to ensure that
protecting civilians comes first. France, being militarily active in the region, could
no doubt help improve training and share
intelligence with local troops. Failing to do so would leave the people of the
Sahel vulnerable to an inadequately trained and politically disparate armed
force united in name only, resulting in the exacerbation of existing problems
and empowering of abusive regimes.