Negotiations at the Carlton Hotel: reasons of the failure

The Rajoelina party was not the only one to play double game, sending some negotiators to the Carlton Hotel while affirming to suspend the negotiations. Contrary to the pro-Ravalomananas, the members of the HAT drove a genuine downgrading campaign against the international Contact Group(ICG), questioning the mediators’ statute and their role in the resolution of the Madagascan crisis. 

In spite of the ICG’s warning of international non recognition of an imposed and one-sided transition, Andry Rajoelina’s party definitely withdrew from the negotiations because of its reluctance to president Ravalomanana’s return made possible thanks to a general amnesty law. The HAT pretended to make an effort while proposing a highly strategic as much as selfish charter.  

The transition is efficient, as a matter of fact. Invigorated by this report acquired from African presidents Kadhafi and Wade, Andry Rajoelina tried to impose to the negotiators and the other parties a revised charter which confirms his grip on power. The HAT and government members remain in place. On behalf of the inclusion, a quarter of the ministries, seven in all still in expectation of appointments, is proposed to the other parties. 

Ten additional seats in the HAT are proposed to the 22 elected TIM senators. The majority hold-up also reaches the Transition’s Congress where the Rajoelina party wants to appoint more of “its deputies” that the truly elected TIM ones. Finally, the law of amnesty has been adapted to have president Ravalomanana stranded prior to his public condemnation. 

Of course, the Ravalomanana party stood tall on its position, similar to that of the mediators, concerning a general amnesty on facts and acts before the date of the signature. Ratsiraka’s party also had to fight hard so that its leaders can regain citizenship and eligibility. It regrets that the Rajoelina herd, in control of the judicial system, is the lone decider on this topic. The legalistic and pro-Ravalomanana movements insist on the fact that the HAT also committed some mistakes and will soon need an amnesty.  

Preliminaries have been presented because the ICG has been considered a referee or a judge that one tries to convince. The parties’ untimely withdrawals, excepted Zafy Albert’s, derailed the discussions. The lasting questioning of the international mediation, sometimes deliberately accused of partiality, poisoned the atmosphere. A pure Madagascan solution has been evoked. This is likely to give relevance to the current balance power.  

The HAT can, as she wished it, govern its imposed Transition, trying to shadow the three other sides in the regional conferences and for the decisive national conference. The legalistic side contests it; Ratsiraka and Zafy don’t recognize it.