Côte d'Ivoire Children. By United Nations Photo. Under a Creative Commons Licence.
Seeing this situation repeat itself brings many questions to our western heads. If we were certain big European or American corporations we would be more than concerned with the instability in the largest cocoa producer in the world. Back in 2000, there were two choices for a president: was it going to be Robert Guéï, then head of the governing junta put in place after 1999's coup, or was it going to be Laurent Gbagbo, famous for being the only candidate to stand against Houphouët-Boigny (arguably the most popular and loved president in the history of the country) back in 1990. There was obviously not much of a choice for people during the 2000 election, as a couple of other candidates were banned by the junta. The people still decided to raise against the head of the junta, who they thought was not capable to bring the country back to order, like in those days under Houphouët-Boigny. Mass street protests forced Robert Guéï to stand aside and let Gbagbo rule. It sounds simple and democratic, but in reality it was bloody and devastating.
Today we see a new chapter. Gbagbo is once again trying to remain in place. Ouattara, one of those banned in the 2000 election, is the contestant. Unfortunately for Gbagbo, it doesn't seem it will end as well for him as it did ten years ago. The general sentiment in the streets is that Gbagbo has had ten years to bring the country back to its peaceful ways and thriving economy, and yet not much seems to have been accomplished. Even with a strong UN presence in the country, and with their leader Guillaume Soro as Prime Minister since 2007, rebels in the north -the so called "New Forces"- seem not too eager to drop the guns.
The UN is once again trying to bring this back into control. Whose control is not the matter, as long as it is under control. When the major cocoa producer goes into chaos, the west sees it as an annoyance that needs to be kept in order. This time the UN vouches for Mr. Ouattara. In fact, it so strongly supports it that it won't stop until the Security Council sends a clear -and very intimidating- message to Mr. Gbagbo: We recognise only Mr. Ouattara, remove yourself or be removed. Even if it isn't with those words -nothing coming from the UN is ever so direct and clear- that's their message.
But, is it really a threat? I remember when a certain Security Council called on the US to not invade Iraq. Did that help in any way? Sorry, what did you just say? Oh yes! The US didn't agree back then to the resolution. This time is different. In fact, it is the US -not the Security Council itself- who says Mr. Gbagbo has to leave. Apparently, only when the US agrees things need to be taken seriously and the UN can function as it should. Russia thinks differently and has decided to veto that message to Côte d'Ivoire. They say the UN should not intervene in internal affairs of countries in that way. Hasn't Russia intervened in other countries' internal affairs too?
As it seems, everything in this world turns around what the big boys (Russia, China, the US and the EU) think is best. Unfortunately it is not always what's best for a certain country or region, but what's best for their own interests. The UN is the puppet they play with, while in reality, if they want a certain outcome all they need to do is call in their secret services, or send in their military. Who cares, in reality, what the UN says? Even more importantly, who cares what really happens to the people back down there in the little countries? All that matters is that they keep their production for the west, so that big corporations are happy and can continue making -in Côte d'Ivoire's case- the chocolates we all enjoy!
