Malagasy-style Mexican Standoff
Can an ongoing political standoff explain the current policymaking inertia in Madagascar? A theory.
(A French version of this post, Impasse Mexicaine, Façon Malgache, appeared in Madagascar-Tribune.com on October 6, 2014)
It’s just like in the movies. The main protagonists find themselves stuck in a situation of mutually assured destruction. There is no obvious way out: someone would probably get hurt. In Western or Quentin Tarantino movies, such standoff always adds a pinch of drama or a touch of suspense to the script. It is sometimes called a “Mexican standoff.” And it looks like one is currently under way in Madagascar—the country, not the movie. Yes, it looks like we may be having an actual Mexican standoff in Malagasy politics!
Anyone trying to understand the Malagasy political landscape is immediately struck by how unpredictable and volatile it is. Loyalty and long-term allegiance exist but are increasingly becoming rare among Malagasy politicians. New alliances, as well as new adversaries, emerge all the time. Political coalitions are set up as quickly as they are broken up. They are often motivated by narrowly defined and short-term opportunistic reasons.
At this particular juncture, the political landscape appears to be dominated by three major coalitions: the HVM faction (supporting current President Hery Rajaonarimampianina), the MAPAR/TGV grouping (supporting the former leader of the transition Andry Rajoelina) and the Mouvance Ravalomanana/TIM (supporting the exiled former president). There are, of course, many other minor factions, but these three appear to be the most significant ones.
The antagonism among the three factions runs deep. Both HVM and MAPAR dread an eventual come-back by Marc Ravalomanana, and would do anything to keep him in exile in South Africa. Both Ravalomanana and Rajoelina seem to want nothing more than to see the collapse of the Rajaonarimampianina presidency, which they consider as an accidental mandate. Ravalomanana has not forgiven Rajoelina for the 2009 coup, and HVM has positioned itself as anti-MAPAR in the political arena. Their mutual antipathy and distrust of each other have created a natural context for a Malagasy-style Mexican standoff.
By way of definition, a Mexican standoff is a confrontation between three hostile sides, in which no one dares make the first offensive move for fear that it may be their last. In a traditional duel between two adversaries, the first to shoot has a clear advantage. By contrast, in a Mexican standoff, the first mover loses tactical advantage and will likely lose the contest. Indeed, if the first adversary shoots at the second one, the third opponent can shoot him down, thus winning the conflict (since both the first and the second adversaries are now both dead).
The Mexican standoff turns into a deadlock, an impasse, because no one wants to be the first mover. The resulting political stalemate may partly offer an explanation for the current inertia in the decision making process in Madagascar—that is my theory. A Mexican standoff is causing a Malagasy standstill. There is no full-fledged conflict. The standoff occurs inconspicuously, almost unnoticeably. Each participant patiently and quietly waits for the others to make their moves. One could go further and suggest that this standoff is one of the reasons why after almost nine months in office, President Rajaonarimampianina has yet to come up with a single concrete meaningful achievement. It could also be why the implementation of the remaining components of the SADC Roadmap for Ending the Crisis has been proceeding at such a slow pace.
While there has been a lot of provocations, the three factions have, so far, refrained from making any major offensive move. A Mexican standoff could last for a long time. It is a war of attrition in which the most patient prevails. It will only be resolved when one player cracks and starts shooting—then somebody will definitely get hurt. Or when an outside faction brokers a deal to convince (or to force) the three protagonists to step back and put their weapons down—such exogenously brokered solution is not likely to be sustainable. Or, when all three players stop thinking about their self-interest and start to reason in terms of the common public interest. In terms of what is good for the nation as a whole. What is good for Madagascar.
It’s just like in the movies. Three characters are finding themselves caught in a situation of mutually assured destruction. At first glance, there is no obvious way out of this Mexican standoff. Someone will get hurt. But this is not a movie. There must be a way out of this Malagasy standoff. The three opponents need to start thinking less about their individual welfare, and more about the welfare of the 22 million Malagasy citizens. They have to start considering the future of the nation and its children. Then, they will realize that perpetuating the conflict is to nobody’s advantage. They would simultaneously walk away from the unnecessary political standoff. Nobody will get hurt. We will then have a happy ending. Just like in the movies.
A Mexican Standoff scene from The Reservoir Dogs
