February 23, 2012

You are here: Home / Archives for African Politics

Is an African Spring necessary?

February 21, 2012 By Leave a Comment
Email

After a couple of sound checks, some laughter and greetings, Accra got ready to discuss the question knocking on Africa’s door since three Arab nations dethroned the kings who ruled them last year. Is an African Spring important? Was posed to the over 150 personalities seated in the main chilly auditorium of the Kofi Annanc Center of Excellence in Accra on 17th January this year.
On the panel to help dissect the difficult and controversial issue were;

• Dr. George Ayittey, Ghanaian economist, author and president of the Free Africa Foundation in Washington DC who has championed the argument that “Africa is poor because she is not free”.
• Anne Mugisha, Ugandan opposition activist and coordinator of the Activists for Change movement that organised the “walk to work” protests in 2011 in Uganda.
• Kuseni Dlamini, South African political analyst, who believes that Africa has already had its spring during the 1990s.

Other distinguished attendees included Chief Dele Momodu (Presidential Candidate for Nigeria and Founder of Ovation Magazine), Miss Elizabeth Ohene (Former Minister of State in Ghana) and Mr. K. B. Asante (A former Ghanaian diplomat).

To the surprise of many, less than 10% of attendees were in support of an African Spring. The majority backed, a non-violent process of dialogue and change process which would ultimately push Africa into prosperity. Many of the nations which swallowed the Arab Spring pill, are still undergoing series of reconstruction. Egypt, Tunisia and Libya are yet to see a decantation after the overthrow their respective leaders. This was the main reason behind Accra’s response.

Others were also of the view that a non-violent African Spring was already underway. This is a revolution led by the educated and Internet activist who will kick against bad governance in all forms possible. According to this school of thought, it is now more difficult in most African nations for a leader to push a whole nation down his own road because of such educated eyes and ears . What needs to be encouraged is the spread of such referring schemes in other parts of Africa.

The issue was discussed at length with emotions flying across the fully-filled auditorium. Most attendees didn’t have the chance to express themselves, because of time constraints. What I guess would have helped the debate more, is a true definition of ‘An African Spring’. By a Spring, do they mean the violence which took tens of thousands of lives in Arab states? or do they mean an opposition to what we all know to be bad governance?

Reactions on blogs and social media;
Prior to the event, a colleague had blogged on the BBC Africa Debate program. BloggingGhana, an organisation of Bloggers in Ghana had selected the topic for its Universal Post scheme. Read their posts and find out what their thoughts are on the matter.
Kajsa – Is an African Spring Necessary? Asks BBC
Gameli – African Spring, not the best way forward.
Edward – African Social Media and the Arab Spring
MacJordan – BBC African Debate; Is an African Spring looming in 2012?
Nana Yaw – There is no Spring in West African

Many other individuals shared their views on the issue on twitter with hash-tag #bbcAfricaDebate. Do a search for the hash tag and follow what was said.

Filed Under: Africa Matters, African Culture, African Development, African Nations, African People, African Politics, Edward Amartey-Tagoe, Latest, West Africa Tagged With: , , ,

Nigeria: benevolence or enlightened self interest? Part Two

February 15, 2012 By 1 Comment
Email

This is part 2  of the state of affairs in Nigeria to see Part one of this article click here

 

The President of Nigeria, Goodluck Ebelechukwu Jonathan (GEJ) is facing his biggest trial yet. He swept into power on a sea of euphoria 29th May 2011 as his rags to riches tale appealed to many aspirant Nigerians. His first term of office (6th May 2010 – 28th May 2011) was due to the untimely death of the then President Umaru Yar’Adua (a northerner). Nigeria is a country that insists on rotational presidency: that is to say that the Commander in Chief and President of the country must be picked alternatively from the north and the south in subsequent Presidencies. The constitution allows for an incumbent President to sit for two terms (eight years) before being replaced.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Goodluck_Jonathan_at_the_Nuclear_Security_Summit_2010.jpg

On the 2nd January 2012 GEJ unilaterally withdrew the government subsidy of oil which had the immediate effect of raising the price of fuel at the pump from N65 to N140 – more the twice the price for the Nigerian who on average earns less than $2/day ($1 = N160). Trade unions took all their members out on strike which brought the country to a grinding halt with the government losing out on millions each day. Now it seems that things have quieted down and the government has conceded to demands and has subsidized fuel to make it N97/day.

 

The proponents for the removal of fuel subsidy on face value make some sound sense economically. On Jan 12th this year GEJ was quoted as saying that the ending of fuel subsidy will save the government N8bn (£5.2bn) a year which will be put into public services. In a prudent government this would provide much needed cash to fix unemployment issues, drive the economy, build new refineries, raise power generation to light up the country with electricity, reconstruct the infrastructure – in particular the roads – diversify economy, invest in manufacturing. Politically however, it has been a disaster.

The government had introduced the reduction overnight with no warning and with absolutely no regard to the impact on the normal citizen. Every day people rely heavily on fuel not just for the motorcar but also for the plethora of generators each household requires to stand in for the erratic supply of electricity from NEPA (Nigerian Electrical Power Authority).

 

“NEPA take light” is a constant refrain up and down the country as the household is bathed in darkness night and day, often consecutively. However the real political issues are twofold. On the one hand many Nigerians don’t trust their government not to syphon away more money into Swiss bank accounts and luxurious apartments/commodities in other parts of the western world. And secondly many educated people are wary of who is really pulling the strings.  As Michael Dibiaezue, a Nigerian political blogger for Africa Files, points out:

“In December 2011, another kind of destabilizing stimulus was put to play in Nigeria. The managing director of the IMF, Christine Lagarde, arrived in Nigeria to meet with President Jonathan. Her primary mission was to order him to get rid of fuel subsidy.”

 

Christine Lagarde (cropped)

Image via Wikipedia

 

And so once again we have a contemporary example of internal leaders doing the bidding of external agencies at the expense of local indigenes. This is nothing new in African politics.

For many observers internally, GEJ is already a lame duck president one year into his first elected term of office. I suspect that his one-year transition as night watchman for Yar’Adua will count against him and the north will not wait another term to get their candidate in. This being the case, those now in office will make hay while it is their turn in the sunshine. Thinly veiled platitudes of “power to the people” and “good will to all men” soon fritter away as the realities of incumbency reveal godfathers to be paid and macro systems to be placated. And so goes the slogan, “Power to the People…but only on election day.”

 

That the staunch followers of Islam in Nigeria have had a desire to “dip the Koran into the Atlantic” (euphemism for turning the entire country into an Islamist state governed by Sharia law) is something I heard when I first went to Nigeria in 1979. The tension between Muslims and Christians at fundamentalist level is nothing new worldwide, but most people of all faiths and none have got on with their daily lives almost oblivious to the intricate ramifications.

 

A rather alarming paragraph in a report by Farouk Chothia on attacks by Boko Haram dated 11 January 2012, entitled Who are Nigeria’s Boko Haram Islamists? States:

 

“The attacks have raised global concern, with a US Congressional report – released in November 2011 – warning that Boko Haram was an “emerging threat” to the US and its interests.”

 

Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan have learned the hard way in the last few years that it is not cool to be an “emerging threat” to the US and its interests, and I suspect the political elite in Nigeria understand likewise. Farouk Chothia goes on to explain in the piece that Boko Haram is a Nigerian Islamist Sect founded in 2002 by a charismatic leader Mohammed Yusuf. The name Boko Haram is a composite word. Haram means in the native tongue of Hausa ‘Forbidden;’ Boko originally means ‘Fake’. Juxtaposed together colloquially Boko Haram has been loosely translated as ‘western education fake’ or “western education is forbidden.”

 

Any critical reading of the interaction of Africa and the west over the last couple of hundred years will reveal how easy it is to come to the assertion western education is “fake” or evil and therefore should be forbidden from an African perspective.  From the moment David Livingstone landed on the continent to Christine Lagarde’s latest visit to Nigeria, it is easy to assume that western education has little to do with talent management and human development and more to do with indoctrination and social engineering in order to secure precious resources for an avarice appetite that must be satiated.

 

Be it a word of warning or a chilling footnote, but African history suggests that western education comes as a package. Benevolence on the one hand, “enlightened self interest” on the other, includes an apparent acceptance that a certain amount of “collateral damage” a.k.a. “death or destruction” be perpetrated in the theatre of operation.

 

Humbly yours

 

Kezie Akabusi

 

 

 


Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Development, African Politics, Kezie Akabusi, Latest Tagged With: , , , ,

It’s Time African Union Turned its Attention to Something Worthwhile

February 1, 2012 By
Email

African Union have been meeting for the first time since the death of its former leader and financial backer in chief, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi last October. The issue of future funding for the organisation may yet be on the agenda even though the proceedings have been dominated by leadership elections.

Emblem of the African Union

Image via Wikipedia

Whatever is on the agenda, it is unlikely many Africans, let alone the international community really expect much from an organisation that has always shown its weakness at crucial moments, the Libyan case being the most recent example.

Yet 2012 could prove to be one of the most crucial and challenging year for the continental body. 25 of the continent’s 54 (UN figure) nations will be holding elections of some sort, from presidential, parliamentary to local and provincial. 5 of these elections will be crucial presidential contests in Angola, Kenya, Madagascar, Senegal and Zimbabwe.

Trouble has been reported in Senegal ahead of February’s presidential elections. People are opposing the decision by the country’s courts to allow the 85 years old incumbent President, Abdoulaye Wade to stand for a third term, which is against the constitution that Wade himself apparently amended in the early 2000s to restrict presidents to only two terms in office. Things could get worse before the elections, and AU may have to intervene at some point.

Madagascar is already a troubled spot; José Eduardo dos Santos in Angola has been facing protests from the country’s youth frustrated by lack of opportunities and unfair distribution of oil wealth. Previous elections in Zimbabwe and Kenya that produced “no winners” and ended up “governments of national unity”, suggest fragile and nervy electoral period ahead.

“Governments of national unity” may have somewhat steadied Zimbabwe and Kenya but the truth remains that these governments are a fiasco. Why give up when you can negotiate for “government of national unity”? It is these governments that gave former Cote d’Ivoire’s President, Lauren Gbagbo an incentive to cling on to power after a lost election in November of 2010. After AU’s envoy and “government of national unity” broker in chief Thobo Mbeki failed to negotiate for one in Cote d’Ivoire, unrest broke and hundreds of innocent people lost their lives and property. Some are displaced, yet to return to their homes.

Of course AU has no mandate to decide winning candidates anywhere but these events suggests that the organisation need a strict code of ethics that will force presidents to respect their constitutions; no third terms where a constitution restricts a president to two terms; presidents must relinquish power once they have lost elections.

After Zimbabwe, Kenya and Cote d’Ivoire, why is there still no policy towards this goal? What would happen if Robert Mugabe loses election and refuse to go, again? Another “government of national unity”? Has the organisation learn any lessons? Or is it that our leaders are reluctant to bring strict rules in case they are trapped themselves? It is time AU turned its attention to something worthwhile and perhaps justifying its continued existence.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Development, African Nations, African Politics, Jimmy Kainja, Latest Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

The Social Media Threat: Myth or Revolution

January 5, 2012 By
Email
Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front

Image via Wikipedia

Zimbabwe has a poor record for press freedom and transparency. The suppression of the private press by the former ruling party is well chronicled, yet freedom of expression is so fundamental to the constitution. Somehow the more open and technologically advanced media, such as the internet, or more specifically social media, has evaded the thinking of crinkly, party political, old salts (or the ‘chefs’ as we know them) who seem to call the shots. That is, until now.

If the former ruling party had its way, social media subscription and usage would be purged. It is a case of ‘if it’s not for the party, it is forbidden’. The people would not be able to express themselves, as the constitution allows, freely and without fear or prejudice. This would be a grand strike against mythical neo-colonialism and century old imperialism, which still pump up the political vocabulary! The people should, of course, be free to uphold their opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference. Well not quite.

You see, there is a little caveat in the constitution which provides for legitimate suppression of this freedom where free speech may interfere with the interests of say defence, public safety, public order, the economic interests of the State, public morality or public health. That just about covers everything any would be activist might wish to touch upon. It is a broad enough caveat, with all those old imperialists hiding behind the chivuru (ant hills), for any would-be law-enforcer to stifle the thoughts and expressions of any activist!

Despite this, and at its recently held party congress in Bulawayo, ZANU(PF), which still assumes to be the absolute ruling party and sole legislator, resolved to ‘crack down’ on social media. For such a ‘crack down’ to happen this would mean the purging of to the entire internet or at very least a few of its activist users, perhaps by mean of incarceration. People would be prevented from blogging, tweeting or sharing their thoughts on social media platforms. It certainly seems like the ‘liberation party’ is fearful of democracy being liberated.

Contrary to this archaic, autocratic thinking, the party’s own, more youthful perhaps, science and technology department are proposing the increase usage of social media for canvassing Zimbabwe’s youth. The party’s existing methods of communication are no longer vogue and in line with modern trends, so they argue. Clearly the old school and the Young Turks have different ideas and the former are certainly not being courted by anything which smacks of any popular freedoms, especially those of expression.

Zimbabwe’s youth is well educated. They must surely see through such resolute, antiquated thinking coming from the party’s senior citizens. One wonders, in fact, how this archosauric party manages to pull the wool over the eyes of its apparently sharp party youth. Surely they must realise how their freedoms have been eroded during past decades, how the economy has declined to their prejudice, not to mention that tiny circle to which party patronage is solely devoted, again to their detriment. What is in it for these clearly gullible youths? Take away their social media and the party can kiss goodbye to the social media savvy vote.

Social media in Zimbabwe has exploded. Government has facilitated this before lamely realising its potential as a weapon of democracy. The mobile networks are advancing their technology from the simple ‘speak and messaging’ era. Now, the ‘browse and social network’ epoch, the technology of tomorrow, is being released and utilised from mobile phones. Per capita usage of mobile phones has reached a staggering 15-20% – (53 per 1000 in 2005) and, as well can be imagined, a huge portion of this is in the hands of the youth.

The septuagenarian leadership is, apparently, ever fearful of a revolution on its doors steps being generated by social media, much like that which happened in North Africa. One has to question why they should be so troubled, especially when social media generates fodder for intelligence eaves dropping. It is a valuable resource. By all their accounts, the ‘liberation’ party is so manifestly popular with the people and, given the chance, ‘the’ party would sweep the polls and resume its absolute power and control… so they say and yet still may.

So why would a happy and content, party partisan, population ever consider fomenting violent insurrection on the platform of social media? Surely that eventuality is as ludicrous as the proposed ‘crack down’, or is there something these awful politicians have to fear; may perchance lose; or are perhaps hiding from their incredibly, so it would seem, loyal subjects? Are there grounds for people to agitate and revolt and is the undercurrent so thick and strong now that this has our leaders trembling in their boots before the first stones are thrown?

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Politics, Andrew Field, Latest, Out of Africa Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Africa: Adapt or be Prepared for More Unrest

January 3, 2012 By
Email

On 11th January last year I posted on this site an article entitled: “Events in South Sudan and Cote d’Ivoire will not define African Democracy“. In the article I argued that the outcome of the South Sudan secession and the outcome of the then election stalemate in Cote d’Ivoire would not define African democracy, I argued that Africans would. I emphasised that it was time the world started paying attention to what had already been a growing wave of protests on the continent – I mentioned Mozambique and Algeria, for example.

East African Community Head of States. Origina...

Image via Wikipedia

I wrote the piece in response to what was growing consensus among the mainstream media, especially Western, that South Sudan secession and the then election stalemate in Cote d’Ivoire would define maturity African democracy.

Three days After I wrote the article, Tunisian people overthrew the administration of Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, ending its 23 years rule. Egyptians followed with ouster of Hosni Mubarak’s 30 years rule. Protests and demonstrations also took place in the south of the Sahara, including Malawi, Uganda, Burkina Faso and Angola. In North African, Morocco has been forced to give its citizens some freedom to vote in order to avert any possible rebellion. Algerian government increased subsidies for basic food items and fuel to ease any tensions and unrest.

I have no any reason to believe that to 2012 will be any different; it could get worse in fact, as such unrest to spread to other countries while grievances that forced people on the streets have not been solved; be it in Tahir Square (it is gone worse since Mubarak ouster), walk to work protests in Kampala, Uganda or fuel and foreign currency crisis in Malawi.

There are scores of problems attributable for these problems, the umbrella term for most of the problems is poor or bad governance and of course presidents overstaying their welcome – like Robert Mugabe and Yoweri Museveni do not help. Speculations of whether Paul Kagame will actually go after his second constitutional term – history suggests that this is not an empty speculation, leaders of his ilk tend to cling on. Kagame may need to come clean on this sooner than later to avoiding uneasiness and tensions.

Problems of governance and “life presidents” are not new to Africa, and indeed elsewhere, the question is why are people standing up against it now? The problems are mainly down to the increasing global integration hastened by Africa’s rapid urbanisation, especially by technology savvy youth who are demanding more from their governments. Uganda and Malawi protests for example, were a largely urban affair – these protests were mainly over fuel and foreign currency. The youth of Angola are protesting because the national wealth – especially oil proceeds are not trickling down.

Pan-African slogans such as “Africa is not poor, it is Africans are poor” (though true in every sense) are losing grip, as it is increasingly becoming clear that utilisation of natural resources into human resource is simply not there – at least it is not benefiting the populace.

Africa will write its own history, Patrice Lumumba rightly argued, yet the increasing global integration, especially through modern technologies (something Lumumba did not envisage) suggests that Africa would have to write its history with global influence, not only via ne0-colonists or conditional “development aid” but because young educated and Western influenced urban populations are demanding more from their governments – Much more than their fore-parents did. African Leaders must wake up to this reality,  or be prepared to rule angry citizens.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Politics, Jimmy Kainja, Latest Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

A Look Back at Africa in 2011

December 31, 2011 By
Email
Satellite image of Africa, showing the ecologi...

Image via Wikipedia

2011 was an eventful year for the continent of Africa, not least because of the wave of protest movements that was launched in Tunisia and then spread all over the world in various forms. Below is a roundup of some wonderful happenings on the African continent that you may have missed.

 

NORTHERN AFRICA
Algeria opened its first underground rail system in the capital, Algiers. The only other underground rail in Africa is in Cairo, Egypt. Tunisians peacefully deposed long-time president Ben-Ali and held elections to usher in their first democratic government. Well done, Tunisia! Uprisings in Egypt and Libya also led to a change in executive leadership in both countries, although in less peaceful ways than the Tunisian transition. Other North African governments, most notably Morocco, scrambled to give the people more of what they want, in order to avoid similar uprisings in their own countries.

 

SOUTHERN AFRICA
Miss Angola, Leila Lopes, was crowned Miss Universe in September; the Kingdom of Lesotho keeps taking giant steps towards gender equality and is ahead of some Western countries; and Zambia generated a lot of buzz all over the world due to the appointment of its first white Zambian as Vice President. In South Africa, paint factories run by our ancestors 100,000 years ago were unearthed. They demonstrate how forward thinking our people were.

 

EASTERN AFRICA
In Rwanda, Gregory Tayi has pioneered renewable energy by building small hydro-electric stations on some of the country’s rivers to provide electricity. Tanzania hosted its 4th annual Swahili Fashion Week to mark 50 years of independence and promote East African designers; a few southern African designers were also invited to participate. The Republic of South Sudan, Africa’s newest nation, was finally born after years of struggle. And if you haven’t heard, Ethiopia now has one of the fastest growing economies in the world.

 

WESTERN AFRICA
Angelique Kidjo, the amazing singer from Benin, continued to be an Ambassador for Africa as she entertained audiences around the world. Cape Verde graduated from the list of Least Developed Countries to become a middle-income country, and its President, Pedro de Verona Rodrigues Pires, was awarded the Mo Ibrahim award for African Governance. Cape Verde is a nation without corruption, and one of Africa’s success stories.
Mali celebrated African photographers at the Bamako Encounters in November. That same month the Paris Photo international fair was dedicated to Africa. Meanwhile, serial entrepreneur Magatte Wade, is redefining Senegal’s (and Africa’s) place in the world through manufacturing.

 

Filed Under: Africa Matters, Africa Trade, African Development, African Fashion, African Food, African Music, African Nations, African People, African Politics, Latest, Minda Magero, Out of Africa Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Corrupt States: Outcome Choices – Democracy or Revolution

December 14, 2011 By
Email
Flag of the Southern African Development Community

Image via Wikipedia


One may ask, is there some correlation between democracy and corruption? It would seem there is. Those countries with autocratic or ‘president for life’ dictatorships, or those that suffer democracy challenges, seem to have a higher ranking, for being lofty in their corruptness, than those with more stable democracies. The recently released Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perceptions Index for 2010 appears to suggest this when compared with other indices.

It is common purpose for lesser free nations to impose extreme controls to sustain their autocratic rule, and this depends upon an array of punitive legislation; a strong securotocracy of partisan service chiefs; systems of patronage, where Peter is robbed to pay Paul, in other words, the party faithful; and a generally kleptocratic ethos, opening up the stratagem for filthy corruption. Sound familiar? Zimbabwe is no stranger to this and is certainly no alien to its poor ranking on the corruption scales.

Zimbabwe, which was ranked joint 154th (with 11 other nations), of the 182 countries surveyed, joins a few other countries in the Sub-Saharan Africa region with similar poor ranking and likewise dodgy democracy records. Within the SADC region Zimbabwe is brought together with two others at the bottom of the corruption cesspool, Angola and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The top three (least corrupt) in SADC are Botswana, Mauritius and the Seychelles (Namibia and South Africa follow, regionally, in 4th and 5th place respectively).

If one looks at the Economist Intelligence Unit’s (EIU) Democracy Index rankings… there is a striking resemblance in their rankings, give or take a few juxtaposed grades and one major exception. Swaziland ranks highly amongst least corrupt, but is rated low on the democracy rankings; synonymous with its monarchic plutocracy, perhaps. Despite this, generally, rank correlation between democracy and corruption is distinctly apparent.

The EIU index places Zimbabwe, Angola and the DRC at the bottom of the SADC democracy standings, while Botswana and Mauritius are top ranking (most democratic) SADC nations (the Seychelles seems not to have been surveyed by the EIU). Here of course is another exception, the Seychelles has strayed from democracy in recent years and perhaps it is only time before the corruption sets in there; if the supposition is correct.

If this hypothesis is anywhere near decent, then, clearly, the solutions to Zimbabwe’s corruption lay with re-democratization of the nation. The people seem to want this, but are far from ready to demonstrate their will. Some years back, Zimbabwe was actually ranked 65th in the TI rankings. This is when the economy was faring reasonably well and the then popular party was getting its own way in power sustenance. There were no threats against the king. Perhaps the corruption ranking was skewed.

Then, about came change…the politicians went and spoiled it all. There was popular resistance to constitution change, which would have entrenched the Mugabe regime; then mindless forays into the DRC to fight another dictator’s squabbles; land seizures, theft and gluttony; denial of freedoms; suppression of transparency; explosion of inflation and consummate hunger; and now indigenisation; and some even say a military coup by proxy.

The people began to resist autocratic leadership and from there on it has been a slide down the slippery slope of political self indulgence, benefiting only the kleptocracy and its patronised bureaucracy. Zimbabwe skidded to its worst on record corruption ranking in 2009 become the 11th most corrupt nation of 180 countries surveyed. All that in just 10 short years, the root cause being simply to sustain a single individual in power, so they say; with his lackey coterie reaping the trappings of his protectionism and patronage. The once popular party now has some of the wealthiest politicians; one has to presume, being the product of lousy, edacious graft.

Some may take heart that Zimbabwe has actually climbed the rankings in 2010. Can we say this is probably the prize of a Government of National Unity (GNU), with ‘new kids’ on the block? Well perhaps not. It does not seem that those ‘new kids’ will be any different. There is a growing cynicism, a new mood, which suggests any new broom, brought about by greater democracy, may not sweep quite as clean as it should. This goes against the theory.

More recently people have been pointing at the nation’s pro-democracy Prime Minister and his apparently scandalous personal affairs presently in the public domain. This is sad and consequently issues of trust are now being raised, personal failures translate to susceptibilities elsewhere. Add to this Zimbabwe’s recent, wealthiest in the World, discovery of diamonds, and one might surmise, unfairly perhaps, that the scales will tip even further down the corruption order, no matter how democratic the nation becomes.

This should be troublesome indeed for Zimbabwe’s new breed of politicians, while the older ones look over their shoulders. The race here must be who gets to the post first, true democracy or the powder keg of violent revolution. We should draw from the fact that famine may purge southern Africa in the months ahead… if we are to believe this, then Zimbabwe could well run short of food, a clear melting pot for dissent. North Africa chose violent revolution, and while the parallels are few; corruption, personal and political self indulgence were core causes. In those primers there are parallels aplenty for Zimbabwe.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Politics, Andrew Field, Latest Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Arab Spring Must Learn from Sub-Saharan Africa Democracies

November 7, 2011 By
Email

There were high hopes amongst commentators and observers that the ‘Arab Spring’ would extend its reach to the countries of sub-Saharan Africa. This has yet to happen; at least in the way it was envisaged. There have been pockets of revolt and demonstrations against incumbent administrations most notably in Malawi, Equatorial Guinea and Uganda. The political atmosphere in these countries remains tense, as the demands of the many citizens of these respective countries have not been met. However we may yet see a revolution of some sort somewhere in sub-Saharan Africa.

yellow: Sahara; orange: Sahel; green: Sub-Saha...

Image via Wikipedia

Talk to activists in these countries and you will hear that the majority of them agree that the Arab Spring has been inspirational. This is understandable – sub-Saharan Africa is a home to some of the longest serving and oldest leaders in the world. Yet the protagonists of the Arab Spring have more to learn from their sub-Saharan Africa counterparts than the other way round. The majority of sub-Sahara African countries peacefully did away with one party rule in the 1990s. These countries continue to struggle to solidify their democracies due to the enduring lack of necessary democratic institutions and the prevalence of selfish, greedy and opportunistic leaders.

The failure to acknowledge the difference between struggles in sub-Saharan Africa and those in the north of the continent may well be an issue of prejudice and contempt for the people of sub-Saharan Africa. There is an unfortunate feeling amongst commentators from the majority of the world that people from this region cannot stage any revolt of their own. They have to copy it from elsewhere – the newly liberated Arab states in this case. This suggestion at least has the merit of pointing to the struggle for democracy in sub-Saharan Africa, which certainly isn’t lacking in this regard. There is no region in the world that holds more elections than sub-Saharan Africa.

But democracy is more than the right to vote. Demonstrations in Malawi this summer were mistakenly labelled an “Arab Spring in the south of the Sahara”, Malawian civil society organisations and activists may have drawn some inspiration from here, but in fact Malawi offers a perfect lesson for the future to the ‘Arab Spring’ – how to avoid sliding back into dictatorship once the struggle for democracy is won.

Images of happy Tunisian men and women raising ink-painted fingers indicating that they have voted were a great sight. Yet this is not a big issue in countries like Malawi – Malawians have voted since 1994 in what have largely been considered free and fair elections. The country has held four successful presidential and parliamentary elections since its return to multiparty democracy in 1993. The last elections were in 2009 where the incumbent President, Bingu wa Mutharika was re-elected with 66.17% of the national vote – thanks to the success of his agricultural subsidies that tripled maize harvest in fours years. Yet a 2009 Wikileaks classified cable shows that the then USA ambassador to Malawi, Peter W. Bodde acknowledged his fear about Malawi’s democratic future. Bode noted:

“Six months into President Bingu wa Mutharika’s second term, MALAWI’s continued development as a multiparty democracy is slowing. Once lauded as a leader dedicated to development of MALAWI’s democracy, Mutharika’s commitment to democratic norms in now coming into question… The recent legalisation of warrantless searches has raised concerns about civil liberties. Wirth the backing of compliant parliament, President Mutharika’s moves show a disturbing trend line.”

I wrote of my worry about the warrantless searches at the time but it was perhaps too close to President Mutharika’s re-election for a lot of people to pay attention. Also, President Mutharika was overseeing impressive economic growth. This was a perfect moment for the Malawi government to pass legislation that threatens prevailing civil liberties. It was not necessarily the repressive laws that eventually angered Malawians. The July 20th demonstrations that left 20 people dead – killed by national security service – were ignited by a persistent lack of fuel, lack of foreign currency, perennial electricity cuts and of course declining democratic freedoms in the country.

Unlike the Arab Spring however, the driving force behind the July 20 demonstrations in Malawi was not necessarily regime change. People were simply making modest and reasonable demands that every government, not least a democratic one, should meet. The protests exposed the lack of democratic institutions that have allowed Mutharika’s administration to rule with total impunity. Owing, in part, to what the ambassador Bodde’s cable described as “a compliant parliament”.

This shows that democracy is not a one-way street. Once attained, citizens must be on their toes and defend it ferociously. A free vote is most valued by those that have been deprived of it for a long time. This carries with it a danger that people’s excitement makes them blind to the fact that democracy does not begin and end at the ballot box. There are some significant differences between the Arab region and sub-Saharan Africa, cultural and geo-political, but the Arab countries must pay attention and draw some valuable lessons on how hard-earned democracy is unraveling in the region despite its record number of votes.

This article was originally published by openDemocracy

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Politics, Jimmy Kainja, Latest Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Zimbabwean politicians’ eerie obsession with titles

November 4, 2011 By
Email

A fortnight ago I felt my blood curdle when I read in the papers that politicians from one of Zimbabwe’s main parties, the MDC-T, wanted their names prefixed with the term “leader” when being addressed.
Instead of the age old Mr, Mrs, Dr, Professor etc, the leaders of that party would be addressed as leader so and so and I thought utter bollocks.
The justification for the use of the new term made things even worse, the party said they wanted to inculcate a sense of leadership. But the very fact that we voted them into positions means that we already appreciate them as leaders.
What made matters worse is that the party claimed that since Zanu PF, their coalition partners in government, were already referring to themselves as “comrade”, the MDC-T also had to come up with a term to differentiate themselves from the other party.
Comrade is a soviet era term that means friend and therefore is more egalitarian, whereas for me “leader” sounds more condescending and arrogant.
This got me to conclude that Zimbabwean politicians have an eerie fetish and obsession with high sounding titles and will go the full distance just to have their long salutations just before their names are announced.
The country’s Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai, has somehow sneaked in the term “The Right Honourable” in front of his name. Never mind that such a title does not exist, the MDC-T leader is more than willing to brandish it about willy-nilly and for everyone that cares to listen.
I can already picture him smiling each time they say the “Right Honourable Prime Minister” and I wonder if in his mind he says to himself silently “I have arrived”.
While MDC-T supporters may think this is a rant at their party, Zanu PF is also notorious for coming up with outlandish titles as they seek to heap their praise on party leader and president, Robert Mugabe.
Each time, ahead of the television and radio news, we are reminded that Mugabe, is the president, “Head of State and Government and Commander in Chief of the Zimbabwe Defence forces” and I really wonder if that is necessary.
I believe calling him just “president” would suffice and would take nothing away from his other lofty positions.
To add insult to injury, at one time fawning Zanu PF politicians mooted an idea to have Mugabe’s name prefixed with the term “Supreme Leader”.
Then there are women from both parties, MDC-T and Zanu PF, who walked out of a meeting because the moderator did not refer to them as “Honourable” before pronouncing that they were members of parliament.
The meeting was meant to discuss women empowerment, a noble topic in a largely patriarchal country, but it had to be aborted since these women leaders felt insulted.
Maybe to our leaders these high sounding titles mean so much to them, but if only these titles could be matched with delivery.
While it is no secret that Zimbabwe has improved since 2008, the country remains stuck on many social and economic issues and yet our elected officials only congregate to see how they will award themselves with more titles and salutations.
Instead of our politicians coming together to decide what to do for the country, us the poor voters, they seem more interested in coming up with titles in an immortal game of outwitting each other in creating the most unconventional titles ever in this world.
Attending a political rally is one nightmare as this is the time these people go all out to flaunt their meaningless titles.
All political parties have something they call protocol, which they MUST observe. In a nutshell this is where they greet and salute all the dignitaries and elected officials in attendance. This part usually consists of half the speech as we, the audience, are subjected to endless praise singing and bootlicking.
At the last political rally I attended, an MDC-T one, the master of ceremony even went out of his way to tell us about Tsvangirai’s honourary degrees from Havard and that he was now a Doctor of something. I wondered if this was important as the same thing that has been recited for the past two years.
Maybe I am too idealistic, but each time I watch politicians from other countries, particularly the West, you never hear all these unnecessary protocols and titles. They just get into the subject matter without wasting time.
In defence of politicians, one may argue that Zimbabwe has not got to the extent of Bingu Wa Mutharika in Malawi, Zaire’s Mobutu Seseko nor Idi Amin of Uganda. Mutharika calls himself Ngwazi, meaning the conqueror, while Mobuto said he was the all powerful ruler of everything on land and sea.
While the enigmatic Amin had a very long title, with one of the terms being “His Excellence President for Life”.
Zimbabwe has not got to this extent, but at the rate we are going I can safely say, our politicians will come up with more eccentric titles that will belittle the titles of these erstwhile leaders.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Politics, Latest, Nqaba Matshazi, Out of Africa Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Grandfather For President: Why Age Limits Should Not Be Required for African Politicians (Part 2)

November 2, 2011 By
Email
Ric Keller's Term Limtits pledge.

Image via Wikipedia

Questions about age limits seem simply to mask bigger questions of term limits and governance – we are arguing about the wrong issues and this deflects from more prominent ones. What we should be talking about is matters of enforcing constitutions, what a particular Presidents vision for the country is and most importantly, how they are going to execute it. Those should be the determinant factors in whether someone is electable, not age. We must not forget that as new countries in post independence Africa, many of the young leaders that came to power are the ones that became dictators – their failed visions for their respective countries weren’t largely determined by age, but by personalities. Presidents like Robert Mugabe are still in power in part, due to making mockeries of their constitutions. If our concern is creating an environment that enables dictators to run beyond the term limits, then this is the issue we should target by ensuring that our constitutions are not just fairy tales or show pieces. Mugabe has had term limits altered in the constitution in order to facilitate multiple terms. Now the debates in Zimbabwe centering on his age include trying to prove his age rather then addressing the constitutional amendments. He may not have had a chance to run again had he not had term limits changed regardless of what his real age is. Age is, and should be a non-issue. It’s simply a distraction from debating the real issue – manipulation or disregard of constitutional limits.

In post-Banda Malawi, an attempt to allow a third term for the first democratically elected President, Bakili Muluzi was effectively halted by the Malawi parliament and courts at the time it was brought to the forefront. This set precedence for the next President, Bingu wa Mutharika, who has indicated that he too plans on stepping down as well. Mutharika’s age was an issue during the election time, but whilst he was subsidizing agriculture for Malawian farmers during his first term, nobody cared about his age. Incidentally, Mutharika was re-elected and is now serving his second term at age 77. Term limits should be rigid and adhered to weather the serving president is considered good or bad so that the constitution becomes the supreme law and not individuals. If a Presidents term is particularity successful, this should not be seen as an opportunity to extend the term limit. If during a term limit a President’s governance is not what was expected then the constitution should provide for a process that will facilitate change as well.  If a person is 70 years old and still has the energy, acumen, and zeal to improve the conditions of their people, they should still be able to run for President. The real issue for Africa that we should continue to debate on is the person’s record and ability to govern not their age. As noted in “Grandfather For President: Why Age Limits Should Not Be Required for African Politicians Part 1″, we should not practice ageism unnecessarily, and perhaps at the detriment of finding another Mandela within our midst.

Additionally, for Africa, the issue of Presidential age has a further reaching cultural significance. In western cultures, the relationship between the young and old differs from African cultures; from a young age, African children are taught to respect and listen to elders in a profound way. Whether these elders are related or strangers, an elder holds a certain positive achieved and ascribed status in most African societies. This is reflected differently in various African cultural norms (ie some societies are traditionally organized by age-sets) and dictates how younger Africans behave towards the elderly. As an example, it would determine the greeting, handshake, body posture, gaze, conversation or other interaction that one would have with the elderly. In the U.S, the nomination of Republican candidate John McCain (particularly after Dick Chaney’s tenure as Vice-President) was a highly problematic for the republican campaign. In part, this is a reflection of a problem of ageism towards baby boomers in a graying America and general cultural attitude towards the value and mental acumen of elderly in that country.  I wondered to what extent decisions to include this information by western (or African) journalists and the continuing debates about age in African politics was a reflection of attitudes towards age in the global North.  For African countries, the arguments surrounding legislating age restrictions for ageing presidential candidates are more centered on preventing brutal dictatorships or poor governance. In African societies were the wisdom and guidance of elders is respected, tackling issues of age and politics proves problematic when it comes to dealing with long serving bad leaders who’s constituency no longer thinks is wise. Although it seems that setting an age limit for presidential candidates is a simple solution, for most African countries, this solution has far reaching dynamics. We need to focus our energy on term limits which would prevent presidential candidates from running and winning indefinitely. It deflects upsets social codes of behavior, deflects attention from setting term limits, and keeps us from debating other issue of governance which should be central. If a President builds schools in your villages, does it really matter what age they were when they built it? Similarly, can that President still not build schools outside of office?

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: African Culture, African Politics, Out of Africa Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,
« Older Posts