Dr. Nsoh Christopher Ndikum, Senior Lecturer in Political Science, University of Yaounde II, explains the intricacies of never-ending peace deals in the Central African Republic.

President Catherine Samba-Panza of the Central African Republic, CAR, last week replaced the Prime Minister and government after the July 23, 2014 ceasefire deal by rival militias in Brazzaville, Congo. What are the chances of the agreement being faithfully implemented?

The Central Africa Republic, like many countries suffering from intra-conflicts, has still not understood that it is not an issue of one person, but a combination of factors. Most African countries are governed by imported, homogenous constitutions that are unable to resolve problems of pluralism.

CAR needs to come up with a pluralistic system that accepts and recognises diverse groups, their values, beliefs, languages and cultures. That is, an inclusive constitution that gives the different people a sense of belonging. Such a constitution should not only be drafted by jurists, but also by social and political scientists. A heterogeneous State can be successful and strong, provided there is a broad-based constitution.

The idea of absorbing other groups will never be a solution to CAR or any other African country’s problems. We live in an era of cultural diplomacy, inter-cultural communication, pluralism or diversity within States. Experience in Africa shows that inclusive government means absorbing minority groups. That should not be the case in CAR. It should mean acceptance, recognition and equality of each group that surrendered its loyalty to build up the country.

Similar deals were reached in the past in a bid to resolve CAR’s recurrent conflicts, but they failed. What are the safeguards that the latest agreement will not also end up in the dustbin?

There is a general problem of non-commitment to agreements in Africa. The July 23, 2014 Brazzaville Agreement was a very good initiative, but it was not backed by the inclusion of any deterrent measures. A number of deals were signed in the then Republic of Sudan before it finally broke up into present day Sudan and South Sudan. It was also the case with Rwanda before the 1994 Genocide. Failure to respect commitments leads to distrust. When there is mistrust, there is problem with managing conflict.

Anybody who breaches the agreement should face sanctions. If violators are identified and punished, it would be the beginning of headway. In many conflicts, there are people who operate behind the scenes to ensure that agreements are not implemented. Such people should be brought to the International Criminal Tribunal for the human rights abuses they committed or be sanctioned by local tribunals.

With the sectarian violence and dislocation the country has witnessed, is transition still feasible by February 2015 with the holding of credible elections?

The sectarian violence is still going on because the efforts deployed so far have not addressed the real causes of the conflict. This can be brought to an end and the dislocation the country has suffered repaired if practical measures are quickly taken to start building trust among various ethnic nationalities and religious groups. The people of CAR certainly wish to see an equitable distribution of national resources and a constitution that takes into account their different aspirations.

The country also needs to practise rational politics, recognise and accept all religions, ensure solid information flow and promptly sanction those making derogatory statements that tend to stigmatise certain groups or compromise peace and State security. There should be broad decentralisation, a robust State that is able to restore security and ensures respect for engagements made. If this is done, a peaceful transition is still feasible by February 2015 as scheduled, with the holding of credible elections.