By By Paul Iddon Jan 29, 2013 in World Why the United Nations has an obligation to ensure a military dictatorship is not allowed to form in the war-ravaged state of Mali. In aiding the Malian government in this endeavour the international community, several nations within which have personal interests in seeing the Malian government succeed in this campaign, need to ensure impetuses are put in place to stave off the emergence of circumstances that could very well see to Mali devolve into a military dictatorship. Britain is sending some NGOs, independent human rights and election monitoring groups should be allowed, in an unrestrained fashion, access to the inner workings of the Malian government beginning when they regain control over the north. Furthermore, ethnic and religious minorities, such as the Tuareg people, should be represented and a referendum regarding the possibility of limited autonomy in the north should be something subject to a national discussion. But whilst various nationalist elements in the north resort to violence or collude or collaborate with groups trying to violently take over the country and install an Islamist regime they should be opposed militarily as opposed to being engaged with diplomatically. If detailed and accurate referendums determine that such ethnic and culturally divergent groups in the north are actually unanimous in their feelings that the government in Bamako is completely unrepresentative of them and their interests they should at the very least be granted a semi-independent autonomous region. This is all pretty common sense elementary stuff and advocating such things in such a broad manner is easy. Nevertheless that doesn't negate the fundamental point. By intervening in this way these forces don't only have an obligation to aid the Malian forces in the training of their soldiers, the confrontation of these Islamist fighters and the restoration of the Malian governments control over the north of the country. They have a more important obligation down the road, that is the scrupulous assurance that Mali is maintained as a federal democracy. If Mali loses that democracy then the efforts of this military coalition will be seriously undermined and tarnished. As they will essentially have paved the way for the establishment of a military dictatorship that will see to large swaths of the Malian people being repressed by Bamako. Even if the Islamists are defeated by a military dictatorship run by Bamako those Islamist forces will have succeeded in undermining and sowing great discord in the state they sought to destroy. Such damages will likely have very long lasting and possibly irreversibly regressive effects on the country as a whole. This in turn will sow future instability and a sense of grievance among the repressed population that could see to large swaths of them flirting with the idea of joining or supporting similar brands of violent insurgents that may very possibly emerge in the future. Hence everything being done now could turn out to be a huge waste of capital -- both human and monetary. Whilst the United States in particular insists it is a primary promulgator of democracy and human rights across the world it should accordingly insist that the U.N exert its vast and varied resources to ensure that Mali remains a democracy and triumphs over the forces of authoritarianism. Not have its people become subjected to them. The United States has been engaged against Al-Qaeda, in its various forms all across the world, for several years now. It consequently has vested interests in ensuring that the Islamist militias in Mali are dislodged from the territory they are occupying and dismantled.In aiding the Malian government in this endeavour the international community, several nations within which have personal interests in seeing the Malian government succeed in this campaign, need to ensure impetuses are put in place to stave off the emergence of circumstances that could very well see to Mali devolve into a military dictatorship.Britain is sending some 330 of its soldiers to aid the French and Malian forces. On top of this we've also been told that international donours are pledging some $455.53 million to help finance this campaign. These are all factors that stress the importance of ensuring that we do in fact have a long term plan of action for Mali.NGOs, independent human rights and election monitoring groups should be allowed, in an unrestrained fashion, access to the inner workings of the Malian government beginning when they regain control over the north.Furthermore, ethnic and religious minorities, such as the Tuareg people, should be represented and a referendum regarding the possibility of limited autonomy in the north should be something subject to a national discussion. But whilst various nationalist elements in the north resort to violence or collude or collaborate with groups trying to violently take over the country and install an Islamist regime they should be opposed militarily as opposed to being engaged with diplomatically.If detailed and accurate referendums determine that such ethnic and culturally divergent groups in the north are actually unanimous in their feelings that the government in Bamako is completely unrepresentative of them and their interests they should at the very least be granted a semi-independent autonomous region.This is all pretty common sense elementary stuff and advocating such things in such a broad manner is easy. Nevertheless that doesn't negate the fundamental point. By intervening in this way these forces don't only have an obligation to aid the Malian forces in the training of their soldiers, the confrontation of these Islamist fighters and the restoration of the Malian governments control over the north of the country. They have a more important obligation down the road, that is the scrupulous assurance that Mali is maintained as a federal democracy. If Mali loses that democracy then the efforts of this military coalition will be seriously undermined and tarnished. As they will essentially have paved the way for the establishment of a military dictatorship that will see to large swaths of the Malian people being repressed by Bamako.Even if the Islamists are defeated by a military dictatorship run by Bamako those Islamist forces will have succeeded in undermining and sowing great discord in the state they sought to destroy. Such damages will likely have very long lasting and possibly irreversibly regressive effects on the country as a whole. This in turn will sow future instability and a sense of grievance among the repressed population that could see to large swaths of them flirting with the idea of joining or supporting similar brands of violent insurgents that may very possibly emerge in the future.Hence everything being done now could turn out to be a huge waste of capital -- both human and monetary.Whilst the United States in particular insists it is a primary promulgator of democracy and human rights across the world it should accordingly insist that the U.N exert its vast and varied resources to ensure that Mali remains a democracy and triumphs over the forces of authoritarianism. Not have its people become subjected to them. This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com More about Mali, France, Malian conflict, United Nations, Dictatorship More news from Mali France Malian conflict United Nations Dictatorship