West delays sending peace force to Zaire

The European Union, the United States and South Africa expressed the will yesterday to arrange emergency help for 1.2 million refugees in eastern Zaire, some of whom are already dying in the region's waterless, volcanic mountains.

France and Spain proposed earlier this week to send a 5,000-strong force to the crisis zone, comprising about 1,000 French troops, a somewhat smaller Spanish contingent, and units from the US and other countries. But some of France's EU allies are shrinking from the idea of committing soldiers to such a forbidding region, now controlled by various small armies and militias.

British military and diplomatic sources yesterday said Zaire would be a principal topic of discussion at the Franco-British summit today. They said they were unlikely to announce a "firm decision" to intervene in Zaire after today, but that they would not rule it out either. Ministry of Defence sources said they were awaiting a firm set of political objectives and a firm military plan.

Britain will be talking to France about the role of any multinational peacekeeping force. "We can't be specific about an operation because there isn't an operation yet," sources said. The most likely role for foreign forces would be to secure corridors for the evacuation of casualties and the return of refugees into Rwanda.

Belgium, the former colonial ruler, said its historical involvement in Zaire (formerly the Belgian Congo) meant that its motives in sending troops would be open to misinterpretation. Germany cited exactly the opposite reason, saying its lack of historical involvement meant that its forces would be ill-prepared.

For France's proposal to take effect quickly, it would almost certainly need the participation of the US, which alone among Western countries has enough giant military transport aircraft for such missions. The US State Department said last week that it would not send troops to eastern Zaire, but was leaning towards logistical support.

However, US officials contend that France has not yet spelled out in enough detail what would constitute a safe corridor, nor which countries' troops would be involved. Washington's own reluctance to send troops stems partly from its experience in Somalia four years ago, and from its desire to see African states less dependent on direct foreign military intervention to overcome crises. France's Foreign Minister, Herve de Charette, expressed exasperation yesterday with the apparent unwillingness of Western allies to endorse the French proposal. "The main obstacle is the international community's spinelessness," he said.

In reality, the problems go somewhat deeper. The chief of the dominant Tutsi forces in eastern Zaire, Laurent Kabila, is warning that no European troops, especially French, should take part in a multinational operation. The Tutsis blame France's intervention in 1994 for enabling Hutu soldiers who had slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Rwandan Tutsis to make their way safely into Zaire.

But there are indications that South Africa may play an important role in the conflict, the first time it has used its post-apartheid clout. The South African President, Nelson Mandela, has promised to play a leading diplomatic role in peace efforts in central Africa.

The EU yesterday backed plans to set up humanitarian corridors to underpin the aid effort in Zaire. EU development ministers held day-long talks with the world's aid agency heads in an attempt to produce a concerted response. However, political differences between member states over how Europe should become involved in the region slowed any progress at the meeting, and at the end of the day, ministers issued a general statement of good intent, which contained few practical proposals.