De
voorzitter van de kiescommissie in de 'democratische republiek' Congo, Corneille Nangaa stelt echter dat wanneer de wereld en de oppositie
het niet eens zijn met deze uitslag, dus dat Tshisekedi heeft
gewonnen, het regime Kabila aan het bewind zal blijven....... Nangaa
staat dan ook aan de kant van Kabila en Tshisekedi...... (hoeveel bewijs van verkiezingsmanipulatie wil je nog hebben??)
De VS
heeft intussen over de grens met Gabon troepen
gestationeerd, waar de ambassadeur van de VS in Congo waarschuwde dat
wanneer de democratie geweld aangedaan zal worden, de VS niet zal
aarzelen in te grijpen........
Kabila
heeft 18 jaar aan één stuk geregeerd en daarbij zichzelf en z'n
maten fiks verrijkt door diefstal van grondstoffen, althans daar komt
de enorme corruptie van dit bewind op neer...... Over corruptie gesproken: de diefstal van grondstoffen middels afspraken met uitbaters van mijnen, staat bepaald niet op zich, grote westerse bedrijven doen niet voor niets graag zaken in Congo..... Zo zijn in Kinshasa o.a. de volgende firma's gevestigd: Nestlé, Heineken, Esri (een schimmig bedrijf uit Rotterdam dat nauwe banden heeft met de VS regering), US marine Corp, PwC, Walmart, Maersk en Air France (en daarmee KLM).
Lullig
genoeg zie ik niet veel heil in Fayulu, dit vanwege zijn connecties
en verleden...... Het is dan ook maar de vraag wie de VS zal steunen,
al zullen de woorden van de VS ambassadeur niet goed zijn ontvangen
bij Kabila, z'n corrupte bende en Tshisekedi (althans als deze figuren niet al voor deze uitspraak werd gedaan, werden gerustgesteld door de VS ambassadeur, wat bepaald niet ondenkbaar is........)
Gisteren werd bekend gemaakt dat het constitutionele hof in Congo de winst van Tshisekedi bevestigt, waarmee de claim van Fayulu dat de verkiezingen werden gemanipuleerd door Kabila en Tshisekedi, naar de prullenbak werd verwezen...... Terwijl de rk kerk die zich vreemd genoeg met de verkiezingen bemoeide, o.a. door het leveren van 40.000 getrainde waarnemers in stembureaus, in feite stelt dat Fayulu de verkiezingen heeft gewonnen...... (dat heeft de rk kerk niet, maar gezien de rapportage van deze kerk over de verkiezingen kan je iets anders niet concluderen)
Niet vreemd dus dat Faylulu de uitslag niet erkent en het volk heeft opgeroepen hetzelfde te doen.
Uit het hieronder opgenomen artikel van Ann Garrison op Black Agenda Report, blijkt dat, zoals gezegd, ook Fayulu bepaald geen lieverdje is........
Code Talking: UN Security Council on War and Peace in DR Congo
Gisteren werd bekend gemaakt dat het constitutionele hof in Congo de winst van Tshisekedi bevestigt, waarmee de claim van Fayulu dat de verkiezingen werden gemanipuleerd door Kabila en Tshisekedi, naar de prullenbak werd verwezen...... Terwijl de rk kerk die zich vreemd genoeg met de verkiezingen bemoeide, o.a. door het leveren van 40.000 getrainde waarnemers in stembureaus, in feite stelt dat Fayulu de verkiezingen heeft gewonnen...... (dat heeft de rk kerk niet, maar gezien de rapportage van deze kerk over de verkiezingen kan je iets anders niet concluderen)
Niet vreemd dus dat Faylulu de uitslag niet erkent en het volk heeft opgeroepen hetzelfde te doen.
Uit het hieronder opgenomen artikel van Ann Garrison op Black Agenda Report, blijkt dat, zoals gezegd, ook Fayulu bepaald geen lieverdje is........
Code Talking: UN Security Council on War and Peace in DR Congo
Code
Talking: UN Security Council on War and Peace in DR Congo / Photo:
Martin Fayulu and Félix Tshisekedi
Congolese
President Kabila wants to shut out the apparent winner of last
month’s elections in favor the of the second place finisher, who
appears to have accepted the deal.
“Congo’s
elections commissioner threatened that the Kabila regime will remain
in power if Congolese and the rest of the world do not accept their
claim that Félix Tshisekedi won.”
Most
UN Security Council (UNSC) meetings are so stuffy that they’re hard
to watch without wishing someone would open a window, turn on the
ventilator, or take the august ambassadors off life support. Norman
Finkelstein couldn’t have been more apt than when he called
Secretary General Ban-Ki-Moon a “comatose puppet of the United
States.” I went through an entire pot of strong coffee just
listening to last week’s three-hour UNSC meeting about the December
30 election in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Congolese
had turned out in unprecedented numbers, often waiting in the rain
for hours to vote, so it seemed like the least I could do.
“No
one mentioned the elephant in the room: US combat troops in Gabon to
invade DRC with air support if so ordered.”
The
ambassadors spoke in code, without naming key players and
perpetrators. Their meanings were cloaked in mind-numbing repetitions
of “provisional results,” “electoral process,” “restraint
from violence,” “existing institutions,” “humanitarian
challenges,” “fight against impunity,” etc., laced with
occasional hints about the cards behind their backs. Most expressed
regret about the Ebola outbreak and the “presence of armed groups”
that compelled the postponement of voting in parts of eastern DRC’s
North Kivu and Bandudu Provinces, but no one dared to say who was
armed or who was arming them (most of all Uganda, Rwanda, and their
international partners in resource theft). And no one mentioned the
elephant in the room: US combat troops in Gabon to invade DRC with
air support if so ordered. Acting United States Ambassador Jonathan
R. Cohen came closest when he said, “We remain prepared to hold
accountable individuals who threaten peace, stability, or security of
the DRC, or undermine the DRC’s democratic process.” The State
Department similarly exaggerated US jurisdiction in the press
release on its website .
The
Russian and Chinese ambassadors both spoke of DRC’s sovereignty
without saying that the US should refrain from invading DRC. France
and the UK, the other two permanent UNSC members with veto power, all
expressed concern that the national election commission is not
reporting accurate results, as it most certainly is not. At this
point I’m not sure what they’re all up to, and I doubt they are
either. There seems to be a lot of uncertainty and shifting sand, as
was confirmed by a Congolese friend of mine who met with US State
Department officials to argue for a democratic outcome. (The US has
inordinate power in this part of the world as it does everywhere
else. Who doesn’t fear its firepower and financial manipulations?)
“Kabila spent
18 years ransacking the country’s resources and doing nothing for
the Congolese.”
Corneille
Nangaa, the president of DRC’s national electoral commission
(CENI), addressed the council via video link from the country’s
capital, Kinshasa. He complained that the elections had been very
difficult to organize because of widespread mistrust. (How’d that
happen? They’re only two years behind schedule, and sitting
president Joseph Kabila has only been in power for 18 years—which
he’s spent ransacking the country’s resources and doing nothing
for the Congolese.There were plenty of riot police outside the
commission before it announced presidential candidate Félix
Tshisekedi’s implausible victory over Martin Fayulu. And only 12
protestors have been shot dead since. So why worry?)
In
cloaked words, Nangaa threatened that the Kabila regime will remain
in power if Congolese and the rest of the world do not accept their
claim that Félix Tshisekedi won. He said that there are only two
options: accept the reported results, or return to “existing
institutions” until a new election can be organized. (And keep in
mind that this election finally took place two years after the
constitutional deadline.)
Congo’s
Catholic Church
Religious
faith may be irrational, but the National Episcopal Conference of the
Congo (COMEC), meaning its Catholic Church, has been the voice of
reason, and democracy, in this election. It fielded nearly 40,000
trained observers, with at least one present at each polling station,
ensuring 100 percent coverage.The data they collected was transmitted
by mobile telephone networks or via satellite telephones to a
national call center.
Archbishop
Marcel Utembi also spoke to the council via video link from Kinshasa.
He reported that the church worked closely with other accredited
observer missions, including the Church of Christ in Congo, but
remained independent of all parties and political platforms and
received no funding from them.
He
explained that, to monitor the election results, the National
Episcopal Conference conducted a parallel vote count, based on a
representative sample of about 11 percent of all voting stations,
both rural and urban, providing a margin of error of one percent and
a confidence rate of 95 percent. He also confirmed the impressive
voter turnout. Regarding the provisional results reported by the
national electoral commission, he said they didn’t match the
church’s own tallies, and therefore called on the UNSC to act in
solidarity with the people of the DRC and call on the electoral
commission to publish data collected at each polling station as soon
as possible. (Friends of the Congo’s Maurice Carney said that most
of the votes have not even been counted and launched a petition,
“Re sp ect t he
People's Voice and Count Their Votes .”)
“The
Church fielded nearly 40,000 trained observers, with at least one
present at each polling station, ensuring 100 percent coverage.”
Dry
stuff? Yes it is. Statistics usually are. But it’s not stuffy,
evasive, pretentious, or dishonest like most UNSC meetings, including
this one. It’s a convincing case for respecting the will of the
Congolese people for the first time since Belgium and the US
assassinated their independence hero and first elected Prime
Minister, Patrice Lumumba.
Archbishop
Utembi did not tell the council that Martin Fayulu won the
presidential election. However, since the electoral commission said
that Félix Tshisekedi won, and the church says that their tallies
differ, we can assume that the church believes Martin Fayulu won. His
reticence no doubt has to do with the church’s goal, which is
honest elections, not support for one candidate or another, and its
caution not to trigger violence. He said that “should there be any
challenge to the outcome, we would then ask the UNSC to invite the
relevant stakeholders to ensure that they prioritize the path of
truth and peace while awaiting the outcome of any challenge, as this
would go a long way towards ensuring peace and stability in our
nation.”
But
what if stakeholders, most specifically Kabila and his ruling party,
refuse the invitation? They’ve clung to power for 18 years, and now
appear to have struck a deal with second place finisher Félix
Tshisekedi to keep Martin Fayulu from becoming DRC’s next
president.
“Fayulu
campaigned on promises to end the horrific violence in Congo’s Kivu
Provinces.”
Fayulu
is no Lumumba; he is a former Exxon-Mobil executive turned
parliamentarian who formed alliances with billionaire Moise Katumbi
and controversial businessman, politician, and former rebel
commander—some say warlord—Jean-Pierre Bemba. Both Katumbi and
Bemba vied for the presidency, but ultimately threw their support to
Fayulu.
However,
Fayulu campaigned on promises to end the horrific violence in Congo’s
Kivu Provinces, and Congolese turned out in droves at his rallies. He
is the candidate they no doubt chose, regardless of what the election
commission reports. What recourse will the Congolese have if Kabila
tries to crush their will again? Will the Church point to a way
forward? Will Fayulu? And what about the UNSC?
Archbishop
Utembi concluded by thanking the council for hearing the church’s
report, and said, “We place your Security Council in the hands of
God, hoping that he will guide you in fruitful consultations and
actions that will promote peace in the Democratic Republic of Congo,
our nation.”
Ann
Garrison is an independent journalist based in the San Francisco Bay
Area. In 2014, she received the Victoire
Ingabire Umuhoza Democracy and Peace Prize for
her reporting on conflict in the African Great Lakes region. She can
be reached at ann@anngarrison.com.
COMMENTS?
Please
join the conversation on Black Agenda Report's Facebook page
at http://facebook.com/blackagendareport
Or,
you can comment by emailing us at comments@blackagendareport.com
