French troops have left a military base in Timbuktu, Mali, where they were posted since liberating the area from Islamist militants in 2013. French forces have been gradually withdrawing from the region, despite ongoing fighting with militants that threatens stability. Locals are expressing unease about the French troops’ departure.

On Tuesday, French troops left their military base in Timbuktu as part of a reorganization of Operation Barkhane announced by French president Emmanuel Macron in June. 

The Kidal and Tessalit bases were handed over to the Malian army in October and November, respectively. The French troops first set up a base here when the city, along with several others in northern Mali, was liberated in 2013 from Islamist militants. Then-French president Francois Hollande visited Timbuktu the day after its liberation and was welcomed by residents. 

Salem Ould El Hadj, a historian and a teacher at Timbuktu’s famous Ahmed Baba Institute, spoke from a public square by Timbuktu’s Sankore mosque about his experience when the city was liberated.  

We needed it, he says, and you’ve seen how the population welcomed them with widespread enthusiasm. An unabashed fervor. It’s true. I was in Bamako, he says, and it’s thanks to [the French intervention] that I came back to Timbuktu.

Since 2013, Mali has weathered two more coup d’etats. Violence and killings have increased and moved further south into the country’s center. Large protests in Bamako have called for the departure of French troops, with popular sentiment in the capital favoring a potential Russian intervention in Mali. 

Mohamed El Bashir, president of Timbuktu’s municipal youth council, says that withdrawing Barkhane troops from Timbuktu will make the region less secure.

It’s not the same feeling here, he says, because the people in Bamako don’t live what we’re living here in Timbuktu. What we’re living here, people in Bamako aren’t living. They should come here, and we will go to Bamako, and they can ask that Barkhane leaves, he says, then they will understand. That’s the reality.

France has been gradually retiring its troops from military bases in northern Mali and moving them to Gao, which will now serve as Operation Barkhane’s northern base. 

General Etienne du Peyroux, Barkhane’s representative in Mali, says that the handing over of Timbuktu’s military base is not an abandonment.  

He says, this is ultimately the goal of Operation Barkhane, to allow Mali to take its destiny in its hands. After a phase of preparation, after a phase of ramping up, after a training phase. And always in partnership, which will be different, with less of a physical presence but just as real, he says.  

At a ceremony on the military base yesterday, the French flag was lowered, the Malian flag raised, and a symbolic key to the base handed over from the French military to the Malian army. Malian military authorities declined to comment to journalists, who were asked to leave the ceremony before their commander spoke to Malian troops. 

French armored vehicles exited the base for the last time.

At the airport, French troops could be seen boarding a military plane headed for Gao. The fate of Timbuktu, once a symbol of Mali’s liberation from extremist rule, now rests in the hands of Mali’s army.
…

U.S. lawmakers just back from a visit to Ukraine warn that Washington’s threats of sanctions and diplomatic maneuvering are not doing enough to dissuade Russian President Vladimir Putin from potentially launching an invasion. 

The group of Democrats and Republicans visited Kyiv Saturday and Sunday where they met with the commander of the Ukrainian special forces and with U.S. special operators and National Guard troops who have been helping the Ukrainian military with training. 

They described the situation as “very concerning” and urged the White House to speed up the delivery of weapons to the Ukrainian forces in the hopes of staving off a Russian invasion. 

“I think promising tough action, just to be candid, after an invasion, will do very little in terms of Putin’s calculus,” Republican Representative Michael Waltz told reporters Tuesday.

“We’re seeing Putin, I think, do this in many respects because he knows he can get away with it,” Waltz added. “We need to help Ukraine porcupine themselves and raise the costs now.” 

Democrats on the trip likewise urged the White House to take actions that will make Russia feel the blowback for an invasion of Ukraine almost instantly. 

“If Putin invades, I want him to know that he’ll have trouble buying a soda from a vending machine in the next five minutes, not that NATO will convene a conference to debate what to do next over the ensuing several weeks,” Representative Seth Moulton said. 

“We need to clearly communicate how the weapons we provide will cause large losses of Russian troops on Day One, not just over time,” he said. “Not just convincing them or trying to convince them that an occupation will be painful, but rather that an immediate full-scale invasion will be hard to take immediately.” 

The lawmakers also expressed confidence that unlike in 2014, when Russia invaded and occupied Crimea, Ukrainian forces are prepared to mount a fierce resistance if Putin sends in Russian troops. They said it would be folly, though, to think Ukrainian troops could hold out for long. 

“I think what we have to work on in the immediate future, right now, is to create the capability for a strong resistance in nonconventional warfare,” said Democrat Ruben Gallego.

“(Ukraine) being able to hold out and impose costs will be very helpful,” he said. And that would “hopefully change the calculation that Putin is using.” 

The lawmakers called for the White House to speed up the delivery of weapons to Ukraine, including ship-to-shore missiles, air defense missiles and additional Javelin anti-tank missiles. 

Some analysts have suggested such a strategy, aimed at imposing a military cost on Moscow, could work. 

“I think if Putin goes big, it could become very costly for him,” Luke Coffey of the Washington-based Heritage Foundation said Monday in response to a question from VOA. 

“They have a very robust reserve system in Ukraine where they can call up huge numbers of forces,” he said. “The further west that Russian forces would move, the stiffer the resistance would become, without a doubt.”

The White House signaled Tuesday it is prepared to stay the course, however, promising Moscow will pay a “terrible price” should it invade Ukraine due to what U.S. President Joe Biden has described as devastating sanctions.

“Our objective continues to be to keep this on a diplomatic path and for that to lead to de-escalation,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Tuesday. 

“We’re obviously engaged in daily conversations with Europeans, with Russians, with Ukrainians, and conveying exactly what we think should happen here to de-escalate the situation on the ground,” Psaki said.

Yet those talks, including meetings by U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Karen Donfried with Russian officials in Moscow, seem to be having little impact on the ground, at least so far. 

The Pentagon said Tuesday it has seen no evidence of a pullback by Russian forces massed along the border with Ukraine. 

Putin on Tuesday reiterated Russia’s concern about Ukraine’s potential membership in NATO during a call with French President Emmanuel Macron, insisting the West provide Moscow with needed security guarantees. 

“The Russian president emphasized the importance of immediately launching international negotiations to develop legally fixed guarantees that would prevent any further NATO expansion to the east and the deployment of weapons to neighboring states, primarily in Ukraine, that threaten Russia,” the Kremlin said in a statement. 

Russia’s deputy foreign minister earlier threatened that Moscow could be forced to deploy tactical nuclear weapons if the U.S. and NATO fail to put an end the alliance’s eastward expansion. 

 NATO Tuesday dismissed such talk as hypocritical, specifically the Kremlin’s call for a moratorium on intermediate-range nuclear forces in Europe. 

“We had a ban, and they violated that ban,” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters. “It is not credible when they now propose a ban on something they actually have already started to deploy.” 

Some information from Reuters was used in this report. 
…

Almost 100 Conservative lawmakers voted Tuesday against new coronavirus restrictions, dealing a major blow to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s authority and raising questions about his leadership. 

After a day of frenzied failed lobbying, Johnson was handed the biggest rebellion against his government so far by his party over measures he said were necessary to curb the spread of the new omicron variant. 

The new rules, which included ordering people to wear masks in public places and use COVID-19 passes for some venues, passed largely because of the main opposition Labour Party. 

But the revolt piles pressure on Johnson, already under fire over scandals such as reported parties in his Downing Street office last year – when Britain was in a COVID-19 lockdown – and a pricey refurbishment of his apartment. 

Rebelling lawmakers said the vote was a warning shot that he needed to change how the government was operating or he would face a leadership challenge. 

Some 99 Conservatives opposed plans for the COVID-19 passes, a much higher number of rebels than was expected. Originally the official figure was put at 98, but the number was later revised upward. 

Among those voting against the government was lawmaker Louie French who was elected as a Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) at the start of the month, while media reported that former Prime Minister Theresa May was among 17 others who abstained. 

Many Conservatives say some of the new measures are draconian, with several questioning the introduction of a certificate of vaccination or proof of a negative COVID-19 test to enter some venues, such as nightclubs. 

Others used the votes as an opportunity to vent their anger at Johnson, believing the man who helped the Conservatives win a large majority at a 2019 election is squandering the party’s successes by self-inflicted missteps and gaffes. 

But despite the rumblings of discontent, Conservative Party insiders say there is not enough of a groundswell against Johnson to dislodge him now, although they hope the vote will be a “wake-up call” for the prime minister to reset his agenda. 

“He’s got to now be in some danger,” Conservative lawmaker Geoffrey Clifton-Brown told Sky News. “And he’s got to realize that because if he doesn’t realize that, then he will be in much bigger danger … I’m still backing him. But he’s got to change.” 

‘Huge spike’ 

Britain reported 59,610 new COVID-19 infections Tuesday, the highest figure since early January and the fifth highest recorded since the outbreak of the pandemic in March last year. 

More than 5,300 cases of omicron have been recorded, with 10 people hospitalized. One person has died after contracting the variant, which is set to become the dominant strain in the capital London. 

Before the vote, the government had mounted a campaign to keep lawmakers in check, with Johnson warning his ministers there was a “huge spike” in omicron cases heading Britain’s way, and that the measures were needed to protect people. 

Ministers tried to win over the Conservative rebels, noting that people who have not had two vaccinations can instead offer proof of a negative lateral flow test to gain access to indoor venues of more than 500 people.

Health minister Sajid Javid told lawmakers he firmly believed in “individual liberty” but that “the responsible decision to take is … to move to plan B in England.” 

But their arguments fell on deaf ears. In addition to the 99 Conservatives who voted against the passes, 40 voted against expanding the requirement for mask wearing. 

“I am sure that the prime minister will understand the strength of feeling within the party about the constraint of liberties,” Conservative former minister David Jones told Reuters. “He is a libertarian himself and I have no doubt that he will listen to the message from his party.” 

 
…

The United Nations’ top refugee official is urging nations to strengthen their support for people fleeing conflict, persecution, and violence and to keep their borders open to people in need of international protection.

In a video, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees, Filippo Grandi, sets the scene for this two-day virtual event: “for centuries, experiences of exile and traditions of refuge have formed part of our collective heritage,” Grandi notes on the video clip. The meeting is the first follow-up to the Global Refugee Forum held two years ago. Nearly 1,400 pledges were made then to better support refugees and host communities.

Senior government officials, refugees and various partners are here to take stock of how many pledges have been kept. High Commissioner Grandi gives the global picture a mixed review.

He says countries are doing better at including refugees in national COVID-19 and health care responses, and in providing protection and greater livelihood opportunities. He says progress has been made toward eradicating statelessness and in the field of education.

He warns, however, that too many countries are turning their backs on people in need of safety and protection.

“To this end, I must repeat my grave concerns regarding certain trends in some of the world’s industrialized countries, including closed borders, sometimes very violent pushbacks, the construction of walls and barriers, the outsourcing of international legal and moral obligations concerning people’s right to seek asylum,” he expressed.

The UNHCR reports at least 83.4 million people have been forcibly displaced around the world, and of that number, 26.4 million are refugees. Developing countries host about 85 percent of the world’s refugees.

Grandi is calling on wealthier countries to assume a greater share of this responsibility. He also is appealing for more third country solutions to intractable refugee problems.

“Resettlement is of course a key avenue, and I am grateful to all those states that have continued to maintain or increase their resettlement quotas over the past years, as well as to the United States of America for reinvigorating its resettlement program,” he pointed out.

Officials attending the event will spotlight several key areas, including the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, climate action, and displacement.
…

A Belarusian court has delivered verdicts and harsh sentences to a group of bloggers, opposition activists, and the husband of exiled opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. All of those of them were rounded up by security officials before a controversial presidential election that saw authoritarian ruler Alexander Lukashenko claim a sixth term in power despite widespread belief that the vote was rigged.

Rights groups consider all six of those sentenced in the southeastern city of Homel on Tuesday to be political prisoners. At 173 days, the trial was one of the longest in Belarus’s history.

The crackdown on the pro-democracy movement has only intensified since mass protests erupted in the wake of Lukashenko’s August 2020 reelection, which is not recognized by the opposition and the West.

Popular video blogger Syarhei Tsikhanouski , who intended to run against Lukashenko before being disqualified and ultimately arrested ahead of the election, was sentenced to 18 years in prison.

After being disqualified, his political novice wife, Tsikhanouskaya, mobilized voters and won the election, according to the opposition and Western countries.

Tsikhanouskaya has been living in exile in Lithuania since fleeing Belarus after the election due to concerns about her safety and that of the couple’s two children.

“The very existence of these people is a crime for the regime. They’re repressed for wanting to live in a free Belarus,” Tsikhanouskaya said in a tweet immediately after news of the verdict broke.

“The dictator publicly takes revenge on his strongest opponents. While hiding the political prisoners in closed trials, he hopes to continue repressions in silence. But the whole world watches. We won’t stop,” she added.

Another blogger, Ihar Losik, who is also an RFE/RL consultant, was handed a sentence of 15 years. He was arrested before the election and accused of using his popular Telegram channel to prepare actions to violate public order.

RFE/RL President Jamie Fly called on the Lukashenko regime to end its “reprehensible” treatment of Losik and other journalists.

“The closed-door trial he and his co-defendants have endured for the past five months has been an outrageous travesty of justice. We again call on the Lukashenko regime to stop their assault on news organizations and journalists and bloggers like Ihar and let him return to his wife and daughter,” Fly said ahead of the verdict.

Among the other defendants in the trial, former presidential candidate Mikalay Statkevich received a prison sentence of 14 years, opposition activist Uladzimer Tsyhanovich 15 years, activist Artsyom Sakau 16 tears, and another activist, Dzmitry Papou, 16 years.

The defendants, who have been in pretrial detention since their arrests, are accused of various alleged crimes, including organizing mass disorder, inciting social hatred, impeding the activities of the Central Election Commission, and organizing activities that disrupt social order. It’s unclear why some of the defendants are being tried together or the reason for the trial being held behind closed doors.

In the wake of the election, tens of thousands of people were detained and human rights activists say more than 800 people are considered political prisoners.

Independent media, opposition social-media channels, and civil society groups have also been harassed and shut down, while much of the opposition is either in prison or exile.
…