President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan yesterday met United States Ambassador to the Maldives Patricia A Butenis.
According to a statement from the President’s Office, discussions were primarily on the current political situation in the Maldives.
“Particularly, the President briefed Ambassador Butenis on the National Unity Government and the progress of its Roadmap,” the statement read.
Vice President Designate Mohamed Waheeduddeen meanwhile met with President Mahinda Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka.
Visiting Sri Lanka as a Special Envoy of President Dr Mohamed Waheed, Waheeduddeen presented a letter to the Sri Lankan President, on his behalf.
“At the meeting, Waheeduddeen noted the close relations established between the two countries, and discussed hopes for further enhancing the ties both the countries share,” a statement read. “Further, Mr Waheeduddeen expressed his gratitude to the Sri Lankan government for the aid and support being provided to the Maldives.”
Dr Waheed’s political advisor, Dr Hassan Saeed, yesterday met with the Commonwealth in the UK, representing the new government. Former Maldives High Commissioner to the UK, Dr Farahanaz Faizal, represented former President Mohamed Nasheed.
The world is watching how Dhivehin are struggling to shape up their future by fighting seriously to give up their banana republic and become a player in the big league of democracy.
This is not an easy task, as we in Europe, heirs from ex-fascist countries, know. Changing a system and a mindset requires effort, dignity, time and a strong will to not want to go back in time. Democracy maybe is not perfect but it is by far the best and the most respectful ruling system we can have in a globalised world.
A democratic party system, that necessarily goes hand by hand with respect for the law, is the way to up the value of a country by giving its citizens a determinant role and thus use all the existing potential in the country.
It is clear that under a dictatorship regime this is not feasible. Dictators, like all authoritarian and nepotistic rulers, have only one main goal: become the owners of the country and sponsors of the body and soul of their people, thus owning their life by shaping up slavery either physically or psychosocially, just like old fashioned little kings. The Maldives has already had enough of this.
It is not easy to move from dictatorship to freedom as, like the dog that has been beaten for years, people when free from the hand of the master will tend to go wild and think that anything is possible. That is not democracy. Certainly a coup d’état is not democracy. Dictatorship always gives a false feeling of peace not because there is real peace but because the leash is on, permanently struggling people’s throat.
It is not possible to develop a country in a state of permanent harassment even if disguised of social peace. The core indicators of a country willing to develop are: work for all, freedom, law and respect for people, culture, health and intellectual development. At the moment Maldives lacks from all these in one way or another.
The Maldives – with a basic income from fish (sea resources) and tourism (food will always be an asset, nut tourism is a volatile business), will not be able to develop without offering more to the world. Strategies might be to attract different casts of tourists, with more or less money, but still, tourism is a fairly young industry in the country – only 30 years old. So far so good, however, it cannot be seen as the permanent chicken of the golden eggs. One day the chicken will get old and no more eggs will enter into the basket.
The Maldives, to survive in years to come, needs to offer added value beyond sea protein and nice sunny water bungalows, and it is a fact that in the present industrial and commercial world panorama that is not possible without an evolution of the Dhivehi society. The Maldives is condemned to develop, yes or yes. There is no way back.
The leash, sort of saying, cannot be on anymore and needs to be released unless the population wants to go back in time. That doesn’t seem to be the case.
In a global market, a country is no longer free, certainly neither from a production-commercial point of view nor from a political one as the world has become small, and it will be even smaller in 30 years’ time with supersonic jets and the communication generation. The only way to progress is by enhancing the development of society, opening up the creativity that will lead to discover new resources, give added value to the world and play accordingly.
Maldives is today in a cross roads, and its people need to take a decision on where to go. The possibilities are not that many, I’m afraid.
The author lives in Spain, has a business and marketing degree from ESADE, is the CEO of an international management coach company and a former owner of a Maldives private company.
All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]
The European Union has called on political parties in the Maldives to commit to early presidential elections “and to determine the legislative and constitutional measures required to ensure that these are free and fair.”
Catherine Ashton, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the Commission, also said that the EU “is of the view that the legitimacy and legality of the transfer of presidential power in the Maldives should be determined by an impartial, independent investigation as agreed by all parties in the Maldives. “
President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has appointed members to such an inquiry, however former President Mohamed Nasheed’s party has disputed its impartiality, and called for the involvement of an independent international body.
The EU said it was ready “to offer further assistance in the field of governance, including in the justice sector, in conjunction with existing actions financed by Member States.”
In the meantime, Ashton said, “the EU calls on all parties to refrain from violence, inflammatory rhetoric and any provocative actions which could threaten the future of democracy in the Maldives.
“The police and army should exercise maximum restraint in the execution of their duties which must remain strictly within their constitutional mandate.”
In response to the EU’s statement, Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) issued a statement “warmly welcoming the conclusions and sentiments contained therein”, and called for “immediate dialogue between responsible political parties possessing a democratic mandate (i.e. having seats in the Majlis or local councils) to agree on the date and conditions for free and fair elections, and to determine the constitutional and legislative measures required to make this happen.”
The MDP earlier this week boycotted a round of talks held in Nasandhura Palace Hotel, describing them as a “clear effort to delay substantive discussions”
The minority opposition Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM), headed by the former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, was present in talks but does not have official representation in the parliament or on an elected council. Under parliamentary regulations, MPs who joined Gayoom’s PPM from the Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) technically count as independent MPs until elected on a PPM ticket in the next parliamentary election.
China defers to India
A report in India’s Hindustan newspaper meanwhile suggests that China has “quietly conveyed” that it has no interest in “fishing in the troubled waters of the Maldives”, and was prepared to “help New Delhi settle the political crisis”.
“Top government sources said after inspired reports that Chinese were behind the overthrow of liberal Mohamed Nasheed’s regime, Beijing used diplomatic channels to assure at the highest levels that it has no political interest in Male’ and wanted New Delhi to take the lead in sorting out the current political crisis,” the Hindustan repored.
“While China offered help in case India wanted it in settling Male, it made it clear to New Delhi that it would be concerned if US, UK and other western powers moved in to resolve the crisis.”
India’s United Progressive Alliance (UPA)-led government “is confident of helping Maldives resolve the political crisis,” the paper reported. “It knows that the local people on streets are with Mohamed Nasheed but that the state power and institutions including army are with Abdul Gayoom, backed by Dr Mohammed Waheed Hassan.”
“Indian diplomatic managers want Waheed to step down and pave way for an interim government under Speaker which could hold free and fair elections for a stable government as early as possible. But the pragmatic picture shows that India will deal with both Waheed and Nasheed for a stable government in Male and does not expect the current President to step down before elections.”
Nobel Peace Prize recipient and President of Timor Leste (East Timor), José Ramos-Horta, has issued a statement condemning “the ousting under military pressure” of President Mohamed Nasheed.
While other countries including the UK and Germany have called for independent inquiries, Timor Leste has become first country to condemn the change of government as a coup d’état.
A former political exile and reluctant politician-turned-president who survived an a assassination attempt in 2008, Ramos-Horta visited the Maldives in early 2010.
Nasheed had the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) greet Ramos-Horta with a seven-gun salute, and introduced him at a press conference as “no ordinary head of state – he is a renowned, fearless and uncompromising champion of human rights. We can learn from [Timor’s] experiences building democracy and of transitional justice.”
Ramos-Horta at the time praised Nasheed for his “conciliatory” approach to the autocratic regime he had replaced, mirroring it with his own resistance to the “heroic bureaucrats in the United Nations and Brussels”, who “favoured an international tribunal to try everyone in Indonesia who was involved in the crimes of the past.”
“Each country has its realities; its challenges and complexities,” Ramos-Horta explained. “I prefer to be criticised for being soft on people who committed violence in the past than be criticised for being too harsh or insensitive in putting people in jail.
“Our approach fits our reality, an approach the “resident of the Maldives and I share – the need for magnanimity. Immediately after our independence in 1999, I said: ‘In victory be magnanimous. Don’t rub the wounds of those who feel they lost. Make them feel they won, also.’”
In his statement this week, Ramos-Horta recalled that during his visit, Nasheed had “alerted me to tensions in Maldivian society and the unabated activity of beneficiaries of the old political order directed at toppling the new democratically elected authorities.”
It was, he said, “now obvious that President Mohamed Nasheed was forced to resign by military elements and the move has the support of former Maldivian dignitaries bent on retaking privileges and political control they enjoyed during the former regime.”
“It should be of concern to the World that extremist elements abusively invoking Islam were instrumental in stirring up violent demonstrations, religious intolerance and social upheaval as the coup d’état set in motion.
“Therefore, it is all the more strange and unsettling the silence with which big powers and leading democracies respond to the undemocratic developments in the Maldives. It has been a sad day for democracy in the Maldives and beyond.”
Former Indian High Commissioner
Former Indian High Commissioner to the Maldives, A. K. Banerjee, has also written in support of Nasheed, urging India “to bat for a friend”.
Writing for the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), Banerjee observed that democracies “are notoriously unstable to begin with and need patience and commitment all round. “
“[Nasheed] was getting increasingly frustrated and the opposition confronted him at every step. Nasheed, long used to agitating for change and clamouring for power, did not, it seems, grow in office and his style was quite un-presidential. One could say that he was being democratic and had the zeal of a reformer. But holding office and leading street demonstrations require different hats,” Banerjee wrote.
Since his ousting, Nasheed has “repeated that he handed over power under duress and as a democrat he hopes India will see his position and, literally, rescue him. Not only that, he wants to bring forward elections to challenge the opposition and test their legitimacy.”
“Having made the point that Maldives is a major security issue for us and bearing in mind the overall international scenario prevailing now, we should bat for a friend. Knowing how slippery the democratic playfield can be and having a sense of who actually has fouled, as a sort of friendly referee, we should award a free kick to the player who has been knocked down.”
However, Banerjee said, “there are no free lunches. We should recommend that Maldivians agree to long term strengthening of democratic institutions and resolve their differences peacefully; different factions must talk to each other and work towards a modus vivendi. Above all, authorities in Maldives must be encouraged to respect human rights and avoid use of force to deal with political dissent.”
Police and protesters attack the military’s headquarters on the morning of February 7:
Police have arrested two suspects, including a minor in connection to the murder of a 21 year-old man who was stabbed on Saturday night.
The victim, identified as Abdul Muheeth of G. Veyru, died while being treated at Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH) after he was stabbed in a series of attacks on Saturday night that left three others injured.
Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam today said that the two suspects were arrested on Monday night and the police are continuing to investigate the attacks.
Shiyam said that the suspect’s identities or their criminal records cannot be revealed at this time as the investigation is ongoing.
Meanwhile, he observed that the motive for Saturday night’s attacks will be determined as the investigation progress.
Shiyam had earlier said that it was too early for police to determine if Saturday night’s stabbings were gang related, or connected to the ongoing political turmoil in the country.
A spate of stabbings in early 2011 that resulted in the deaths of several young men was blamed by police on gang related activity. Following a police crackdown, relatively few violent attacks were reported for the remainder of the year.
Meanwhile, this is the second murder reported this year. The first was a 76 year-old man who was found murdered with multiple stab wounds on Kudahuvadhoo island in Dhaalu Atoll on Janurary 8.
The first talks of the political parties on the “Roadmap for a Possible Way Forward”, initiated by the President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan, were cancelled on Monday night after the former ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) boycotted the meeting calling it “a clear effort to delay substantive discussions”.
The first meeting was set to start at Nasandhura Palace Hotel at 8.30pm last night with representatives from nine parties, with former Tourism Minister Ahmed Mujthaba appointed as convener by Dr Waheed to mediate the talks.
Representatives of all parties aside from the MDP attended the meeting. After a 15 minute wait for MDP members to appear, Mujthaba told the press the meeting was cancelled due to the absence of MDP.
He noted that unofficial talks however continued between the parties and that date for the next meeting would be set when MDP’s participation was confirmed.
Meanwhile, in a press statement the MDP said it had planned to participate in the talks, and expressed the party’s “commitment to serious talks between responsible political parties to ensure a smooth transition towards early elections, as per the roadmap mediated by the Indian Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai.”
However, according to the statement, MDP decided not to take part “when it became clear that the talks were to include political parties with no democratic mandate, and that they would focus on procedural issues such as the timing and venue for future talks – a clear effort to delay substantive discussions.”.
MDP said the talks must focus on substantive issues such as the timing and conditions for early elections and related transitional arrangements – topics which MDP officials claim were not on last night’s agenda.
“Yesterday’s events – together with comments by Dr Waheed reported in the media – create doubts as to whether he is agreeable to early elections at all,” MDP claimed in the statement.
“The Maldives is in the midst of a serious political crisis. A crisis which can only be resolved by free and fair elections at an early date. In a democracy, only the people have the right to decide who should govern them. It is therefore vital that all serious political parties meet as soon as possible to address the real issue – the date and conditions for early elections. MDP stands ready to participate in such talks for the good of the country,” said MDP Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor.
The party also said it had made it clear that the talks must only involve parties which either have a seat in parliament or in a local council.
Minority opposition Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) headed by the Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, which was present in last night’s talks, does not have official representation in the parliament or on an elected council. Under parliamentary regulations, MPs who joined Gayoom’s PPM from the Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) technically count as independent MPs until elected on a PPM ticket in the next parliamentary election.
Minivan News asked Mujthaba about the MDP’s allegations and sought details on the talks, however he responded that the Roadmap Secretariat had decided to temporarily cease giving interviews to the media.
“We have decided to not to give any further interviews to the press at the moment as we are trying to set up the next roadmap meeting,” he explained. “But we will continue to invite MDP to participate in the meeting.
However he added that last night’s meeting had an “open agenda” and members were allowed to discuss all elements of the roadmap.
Meanwhile, speaking on Tuesday morning, Nasheed said the MDP’s position remained that disputes should be resolved through peaceful dialogue and negotiations.
He added that “MDP and most Maldivian citizens” agreed with the DRP’s position that in the event of an early presidential election this year the constitution should be amended to ensure there would not be another election in 2013.
Discussions should therefore involve political parties represented in parliament as a two-third majority would be needed to approve the constitutional amendments, Nasheed continued, suggesting that smaller parties without any seats in Majlis “would find it difficult at the moment to help with deciding a date for an election.”
Minority parties could however participate in talks on reforming the judiciary and security services, Nasheed suggested.
MDP would enter discussions today on amending the constitutional provision requiring an election in 2013, Nasheed revealed, inviting other political parties to join the talks.
“In my view, what we lost was democracy,” Nasheed said. “What we lost was not the rule of Galolhu Kenereege Mohamed Nasheed. His rule isn’t important either. Nor is he a very important person. What we have lost are principles and conventions we have long-desired for this country – these were essential for our development and progress.”
The sudden resignation of President Nasheed in Maldives on February 7 took many by surprise, writes A. K. Banerjee, former Indian High Commissioner in the Maldives, for the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA).
The media in India reported it as a coup, a military takeover, the President was forced out, etc. Nasheed’s description of the change as a coup gave it a particular flavour. India is allergic to coups in its neighbourhood. It has had to get used to them in Pakistan and is wary of them in Bangladesh. This reflex is rooted in its deep seated commitment to democracy with a supreme civilian authority.
Coups also imply surprises and India does not particularly care for them. In the instant case the association of the word coup with Maldives set off a reflex and a chain reaction set in thereafter. India remembered the coup attempted in Maldives in 1988 when it had to rush its forces there to restore the government’s authority. An implied threat to its own security from an unstable situation in Maldives caused the Government to take the line of least resistance ie, accept the newly sworn in President, Dr. Waheed and assure him support and treat the matter as an internal issue of Maldives, to be sorted out by them.
Overall, the message that went out of New Delhi was that while it cannot be unconcerned about happenings in that country, it is prepared to work with whoever is legitimately in power there. However, the issue of legitimacy has now come to the fore and many feel that this needs to be looked at closely. Also, by being the first country to accept the developments there as an internal matter, India set an example for others to follow [witness the US position].
Democracies are however notoriously unstable to begin with and need patience and commitment all round. Maldives is no different and its institutions have not worked properly so far. The President was getting increasingly frustrated and the opposition confronted him at every step. Nasheed, long used to agitating for change and clamouring for power, did not, it seems, grow in office and his style was quite un-presidential. One could say that he was being democratic and had the zeal of a reformer. But holding office and leading street demonstrations require different hats.
Nasheed and his supporters faced opposition from a rich business class which controlled the mainstay of the Maldivian economy, i.e., the tourism industry. The downturn in the European economies, which sends the bulk of tourists to Maldives, has negatively affected this sector, which, in turn, impacted on the domestic political dynamics.
In describing his ouster as a coup, perhaps Nasheed wanted to indirectly involve India which he felt he was justified in doing given his attempts to bring the two countries closer, apart from his genuine democratic credentials. Yet at the same time he did not want armed conflict in his country or a civil war like situation. Since his ouster he has been loudly proclaiming his democratic credentials and wants India to hear him. He has repeated that he handed over power under duress and as a democrat he hopes India will see his position and, literally, rescue him. Not only that, he wants to bring forward elections to challenge the opposition and test their legitimacy at the hustings.
What should India do? Having made the point that Maldives is a major security issue for us and bearing in mind the overall international scenario prevailing now, we should bat for a friend. Knowing how slippery the democratic playfield can be and having a sense of who actually has fouled, as a sort of friendly referee, we should award a free kick to the player who has been knocked down.
How can we do that? We should work for a unitary government and persuade all to agree to early elections. But since there are no free lunches, we should recommend that Maldivians agree to long term strengthening of democratic institutions and resolve their differences peacefully; different factions must talk to each other and work towards a modus vivendi. Above all, authorities in Maldives must be encouraged to respect human rights and avoid use of force to deal with political dissent.
The Commonwealth ministerial delegation sent to investigate the circumstances surrounding the sudden transfer of power in the Maldives on February 7 has departed.
The information collected by the delegation will be reviewed and presented to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) at an extraordinary meeting to be held in London this week.
The delegation, led by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Communications of Trinidad and Tobago, Surujrattan Rambachan, gave a brief but vague statement to the media on their departure. He was accompanied by Dr Dipu Moni, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, and Dennis Richardson AO, Australian Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and former head of Australia’s secret intelligence agency, ASIO.
The objective, Rambachan said, was “to develop a better understanding of the circumstances surrounding the transfer of power in this country earlier this month, as well as to promote adherence to Commonwealth values and principles. We believe we are returning with the enhanced understanding of the situation that we came to seek.”
“We have held detailed discussions with a wide range of stakeholders, including President Waheed, former President Nasheed, the Speaker of the Majlis, the Chief Justice, several political parties, independent institutions, relevant military and police personnel, as well as others. We have also consulted international partners and civil society,” Rambachan said, reading the delegation’s departure statement.
“The Maldives is a valued member of the Commonwealth and the Commonwealth has had a long association with the democratic transition in this country. It will continue to support Maldives in every possible way as it seeks to find a way forward at this difficult time.”
Answering questions, the delegation resisted being drawn into discussion as to their preliminary findings, or their position on early elections, stating that the mission was non-judgemental and that much of the information received was still to reviewed before a report was compiled ahead of the CMAG meeting.
“We cannot pronounce at this stage whether something is illegal or legal, constitutional or unconstitutional,” said Dr Moni. “We have collected information and we really need to sit down and go through it. We came here with a very neutral mind. We will report our recommendations to CMAG.”
Whatever conclusion was arrived at “must be according to the interest of the Maldivian people,” noted Rambachan.
“We had discussions with political parties on the topic of a way forward. Early elections are something people are considering and we have asked for views and opinions. That will form part of our deliberations in London. The wishes of the Maldivian people must be taken into full consideration.”
President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has appointed Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed as Islamic Minister, and Dr Mohamed Muiz as Environment Minister.
Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s daughter, Dhunya Maumoon, was also appointed State Minister for Foreign Affairs.
Sheikh Shaheem was ranked one of the world’s top 500 most influential Muslims in 2010 by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre (RISC) in the Kingdom of Jordan.
He resigned from his post as State Minister of Islamic Affairs under former President Mohamed Nasheed’s government, in December 2010.
His resignation followed the burning of the Israeli flag in Republic Square over opposition to a visiting delegation of Israeli eye surgeons, whom Islamic NGOs had accused of coming to the Maldivies to illegally harvest organs. Shaheem was one of the speakers at the event, along with current Vice President of Gayoom’s Progressive Party of he Maldives (PPM), Umar Naseer, voicing anger at the acceptance of aid from Israel.
Former Press Secretary for Nasheed, Mohamed Zuhair, told Minivan News at the time that in light of a recent number of protests against government policy allegedly involving Shaheem, “it was possible that the State Minister may have decided his position was untenable”.
Sheikh Shaheem was subsequently employed as a lecturer at Villa College, owned by Jumhoree Party (JP) MP and resort tycoon Gasim Ibrahim.
Shaheem has been an outspoken proponent of the study of comparative religion at higher secondary level, stating that “it is important for both Muslims and non-Muslims to compare their religions and cultures, and to compare philosophies.”
However he also warned against a move by the Education Ministry to make Islam and Dhivehi optional at higher secondary level.
Presenting himself as the face of moderate Islam in the Maldives, in early 2010 he became the first Islamic scholar from the Ministry to visit the UK with a government delegation.
He attended discussions on counter-terrorism with a range of relevant authorities, including the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Cabinet Office, Home Office and heads of counter-terrorism in the Justice Ministry, and met with Abbas Faiz of Amnesty International.
“The main objective was to discuss rapidly growing concerns around extremism and terrorism with relevant stakeholders in the UK,” Shaheem told Minivan News at the time: “There was a lot of discussion on ideas, such as how to fight ideologies and radical ideas. It was a very nice trip.”
More recently, he was accused of sexual misconduct in a video broadcast by Raajje TV, although the allegations were never clarified as Raajje TV claimed the station could not release further footage “in the interest of public decency”.
Shaheem responded at the time that he did “not wish to comment on matters regarding my private life while I am waiting for evidence. I will issue my comment when the time is appropriate.”
Cabinet appointments
All but a few of the cabinet ministers remain to be appointed by President Dr Waheed, and will need approval from parliament when it resumes on March 1.
The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has accused Dr Waheed of replacing the cabinet with mostly Gayoom supporters and senior opposition figures, particularly to the positions of Defence Minister (Mohamed Nazim), Police Commissioner (Abdulla Riyaz), Youth/Human Resources Ministry (Mohamed ‘Mundu’ Shareef, Gayoom’s spokesperson), Attorney General (Azima Shukoor, Gayoom’s lawyer), and Home Minister (DQP member Dr Mohamed Jameel).
Dr Waheed has dismissed the claims as misleading, saying that “Anything other than President Mohamed Nasheed’s government is now being painted as the old government, as a return to the old regime. In this country most of us grew up and got education during the last 33 years, and most of the well educated people in this country worked in government. The government was the biggest employer in the country and continues to be so.
“Therefore don’t be surprised that some people served in President Gayoom’s government. That doesn’t mean that anyone seen in the last 33 years has allegiance to a particular person. This is a very narrow way of looking at it. If you look at cabinet you can see I have been very careful in my selections.”
(0)Dislikes
(0)