In a move that has sent shockwaves through the international community and its own populace, the Maldives, a nation of 100% Muslim population, has abstained from voting on a United Nations resolution commemorating the massacre of thousands of Muslims in Bosnia 29 years ago. This decision, made under the leadership of the purportedly devout President Dr. Mohammed Muizzu, has not only raised serious questions about the country’s foreign policy independence but also ignited a firestorm of criticism both domestically and abroad.
The resolution in question seeks to honor the memory of 8,372 Muslims brutally killed in Srebrenica, Bosnia, on July 11, 1995, during the Bosnian war. The Maldives stands out as the only Muslim nation to abstain from this resolution, a fact that has left many bewildered and outraged. The decision becomes even more perplexing when considering that former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who held office during the 1995 genocide, had unequivocally condemned the violence at the time.
This stark departure from historical precedent has not gone unnoticed. Gayoom himself has publicly called for the current government to explain its reasons for not supporting the UN resolution. His demand for transparency echoes the sentiments of many Maldivians who find themselves grappling with their nation’s puzzling stance on an issue that, by all accounts, should align with the country’s religious and moral values. As the controversy unfolds, speculation runs rampant about the underlying motivations for this decision. One prevailing theory points to China’s growing influence over the island nation. China, along with 18 other countries, voted against the resolution, while 84 nations voted in favor. The Maldives joined 67 other countries in abstaining, a position that aligns suspiciously well with Chinese interests.
China’s economic ambitions in Eastern Europe provide a compelling backdrop to this geopolitical maneuvering. In recent years, Beijing has poured billions of dollars into investments across Eastern Europe, viewing the region as a crucial gateway to Western European markets, particularly for its burgeoning electric vehicle industry. The European Union’s increasingly cautious stance towards China, labeling it as an economic competitor, has only intensified China’s efforts to entrench itself in Eastern Europe.
Given this context, it’s not far-fetched to suspect that China has leveraged its considerable influence to sway votes against the resolution or, at the very least, encourage abstentions. The Maldives’ decision to abstain fits neatly into this narrative, raising alarming questions about the extent of Chinese control over the island nation’s foreign policy.
President Muizzu’s administration, which came to power on a platform of sovereignty and pro-Maldivian policies, appears to be faltering in its commitment to these principles. The abstention on the UN resolution is just one example of how the government’s actions are increasingly at odds with its rhetoric. This discrepancy becomes even more glaring when examined alongside other concerning developments within the country.
One particularly troubling trend is the unchecked appointment of political supporters to government posts, a practice that is placing an enormous strain on the national treasury. Data reveals that the state expenditure on political appointees is reaching astronomical levels. In the Sports Ministry alone, 195 political appointees will cost the government a staggering 224 million Maldivian rufiyaa over Muizzu’s five-year term. The Home Ministry isn’t far behind, with 53 political appointees set to cost 97 million rufiyaa during the same period.
When extrapolated across all ministries, the financial burden of these appointments becomes truly mind-boggling. This rampant patronage system not only undermines the principles of meritocracy and good governance but also places an unsustainable burden on the country’s already fragile economy. The economic repercussions of these decisions are already being felt by ordinary Maldivians. The State Electricity Company has been sending out exorbitant bills, sparking public protests and calls for President Muizzu’s resignation. Citizens are rightfully outraged, accusing the administration of manipulating utility bills to cover the costs of its bloated political apparatus.
In stark contrast to China’s seemingly self-serving influence, India has emerged as a more reliable neighbor and economic partner to the Maldives. The Indian government has announced plans to roll over $50 million in debt due in May and is considering converting another $50 million due in September 2024 into grant aid.[2] This gesture of goodwill could provide significant relief to the beleaguered Maldivian treasury, highlighting the difference between partners who seek to support and those who seek to control. The Maldives’ abstention from the UN resolution on the Srebrenica genocide serves as a stark reminder of the complex web of international relations and the price of economic dependence. It raises troubling questions about the erosion of national sovereignty and the compromise of fundamental values in the face of geopolitical pressures.
As a nation that has long prided itself on its Islamic identity and moral standing, the Maldives’ failure to stand in solidarity with the victims of a Muslim genocide is not just a diplomatic misstep—it’s a betrayal of its own principles. The decision casts a long shadow over President Muizzu’s administration, calling into question its ability to navigate international waters without becoming a pawn in larger geopolitical games. The controversy surrounding this vote should serve as a wake-up call for the Maldivian people and their government. It underscores the urgent need for transparency in foreign policy decisions and a reevaluation of the country’s international alignments. The Maldives must ask itself whether the economic benefits of aligning with powers like China are worth the cost to its autonomy, values, and international standing.
As the island nation grapples with these challenges, it stands at a crossroads. The path forward requires a delicate balance between economic pragmatism and moral integrity, between leveraging international partnerships and preserving national sovereignty. The Maldives’ ability to navigate these turbulent waters will not only determine its place on the global stage but also shape the future and identity of its people. The abstention on the Srebrenica resolution may be just one vote in the grand scheme of international politics, but it represents a critical moment for the Maldives. It is a test of the nation’s resolve to stand by its principles, even in the face of economic pressures and geopolitical maneuvering. As the world watches, the Maldives must decide whether it will chart its own course or allow itself to be steered by the currents of foreign interests, potentially compromising the very essence of what it means to be Maldivian in the process.