Posted on

The Ongoing Arab/Libya Revolution and International Diplomacy

”After half a century during which tyrants have ruled the Arab world, their control is weakening. After 40 years of decaying stability, the rot is eating into the stability. The Arab masses will no longer accept what they used to accept. The Arab elites will no longer remain silent”.- Ari Shavit; the Arab Revolution and the Western decline. How true are the words above on developments around the Arab community in recent times? The revolution started from Tunisia, down to Egypt, replicated in Yemen and Algeria, and most recently the heat is now on Gadhafi in Libya.

Little did 26-year old Mohammed Bouazizi of Tunisia knew that his action would trigger a revolution to spread to other Arab nations when he set himself ablaze in the impoverished city of Sidi Bouzid, 300 kilometers from Tunis, the Tunisian capital. Mohammed Bouazizi’s December 17, 2011 action (he died untimely in January 4, 2011) led to the disgraceful end of a 23-year old administration of Tunisian dictator, President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali, the 30-year rule of Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak; and with the 41year rule of Muammar Gadhafi hanging in the balance. With the revolution spreading fast and deadly like contagious flu, the tragedy is that no single Arab country has immunity against this plague; no single Arab country practices sustainable democracy.

When the Middle East sneezes, the world catches cold as it were. If Mohammed Bouazizi had carried out his self immolation in other part of the world, it would have been doubtful if his death would have had the same impact as it does now. Until and unless an alternative and sustainable source of energy dethrones crude oil, the Middle East and by extension the Arab world will remain strategically important to the global economy to a worrisome extent. According to the International Energy Agency, ‘Middle Eastern producers will supply 50 percent of U.S oil imports, 50 percent of Europe, 80 percent of China’s, and 90 percent of Japans by 2030’.

The statistics above indicate that the survival and sustainability of the world powers and G-7 nations lies heavily in the Middle East. Crude oil from economic realities will, until an alternative source of energy is developed, continue to drive the world’s economy. As shown above, this is highly concentrated in the Middle East, though other nations such as Nigeria and Libya in Africa are also endowed with this natural resource. However, because the pace of crude oil production centers in the Middle East, that region remains to a large extent politically, economically and socially relevant to the other regions of the world. Hence, the present revolution going on in some oil-riched nations need to be objectively and holistically examined vis-à-vis their political and economic relevance. The present civil unrest going on in Libya brings this to the fore. It is imperative to examine the role of local and international bodies on the unceasing struggle for liberation by Libyans. Libya under President Gadhafi is a signatory to the Arab league, the African Union and by extension the United Nations Organization. Libya’s oil makes it economically relevant to member nations in the Arab bloc and to the international community.

The A.U was founded in Sirte, Gadhafi’s hometown in 1999, and has been well funded with Libya’s oil wealth. The A.U’s initial silence of the uprising in North Africa was criticized by many in Africa including a  public statement by Gambia’s Yahya Jameh. The A.U like other regional and international organizations including the Arab league, has a set of objectives which include respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of member states (includling respect for Human Rights and observation of the U.N charter on Human Rights). The A.U at the beginning of the Libyan crisis was heavily involved with the situation in Cote D’Ivoire – a country with an internal strife but of no apparent relevance or importance to the West. Through its Peace and Security Council, the A.U has put in place a coalition of Heads of States Panel (includling political leaders of S/Africa, Uganda, Mauritania, etc) to look into the situation in Libya on a fact-finding mission and forward possible recommendations. Until recently, the U.N security council through a resolution passed a ‘no fly zone’ law on Libya, adopted also by the Arab league, though it (Arab league) differs on the bombing strategy as embarked upon by the the U.S, U.K and France. This has resulted in Gadhafi’s declaration of cease fire in major parts of the country where his loyalists are in a deadlock to the opposition.

Many political observers and concerned individuals have proposed a military intervention in the ousting of Gaddafi from power. However, as noted above, the U.N, A.U and Arab league will to a large extent respect the sovereignty of Libya as an independent nation. In my view, it is imperative as it was in previous movements (Tunisia and Egypt), and as indicated in the opening quote of this piece, that concerned bodies such as the U.N, A.U and Arab League, regardless of the political and economic relevance of Libya as an oil-rich nation, weigh the over 40-years of Gaddafi’s administration on abuse of power, gross indiscipline, corruption, disregard for human rights as alleged by opposition. The U.N, A.U and Arab League though recognizing the sovereignty of Libya, should never display a ‘blind eye’  to human rights and related abuses alleged on Gaddafi. If the findings of the panel and its subsequent recommendations reveals a gross abuse of power, then the law should take its rightful course as universally accepted under the charters of the U.N and other relevant bodies. Nobody is above the law, Gaddafi is not above the law. If he is found wanting after a thorough investigation, he should be made to face the wrath of the law.

As fervently addressed in an earlier article, Gaddafi must come to terms with the fact that true sovereignty lies in the hands of the people of Libya and not in an individual. He should remember, if forgotten, that autocratic heroes such as Pharaoh of Egypt, Alexander the Great of Greece, Adolf Hitler of Nazi Germany during the second World -war are now in the book of history. He should respond to the call for a CHANGE from his people. Libyans, regardless of what the international community and constituted bodies are doing right now or plans to do, should learn to localize the global in there approach towards a national Change. All concerned agencies must work jointly towards the same goal; respect for rule of law, good governance and a sustainable democratic rule in Libya. The global community and especially Africans eagerly awaits the liberation of of the Libyan people.

SOLOMON JOHNSON.

Share
Posted on

THEY CAME: The North African Uprising and Foreign Interference, A Lesson for African Leaders and Citizens

RAZIAH MWAWANGA

There has been a lot of drama and turmoil in the recent days as the African continent, especially the northern part, is torn into pieces as people cry out for blood and change. What initially started as one man’s protest against unjust treatment by law enforcement officers has thrown North Africa into full-blown chaos. The fire has moved from Tunisia to Egypt, Jordon, Bahrain, Yemen and the dust seemed to have settled in Libya.

Everybody wants to see old leaders and governments step out of office, give them democracy, more jobs and better lifestyles, but,  as one wise man said, whether this is good or bad, no one knows.

What puzzles me and I find most interesting is the countries in which the trend has taken momentum. All the affected countries seem to have one thing in common; either they have been ruled by the monarchy or self-proclaimed life leadership.

Another fascinating thing is that some of these countries have strategic economies, are powers to reckon with and are superpowers in their own rights. They command respect, fear and envy among their neighbours and the world in general because of their strategic positions, economies and principles.

Take Egypt for example: it is the home of the ancient civilization, excellent tourist attraction, vibrant economy and a leader in the Arab states politics. It stands out between the old and new civilization in North Africa and has commanded international respect and authority as a link between the Arab states and the West. It is also the only Arab state that can see eye to eye with Israel and used to mediate and bumper in Israeli Arab politics.

Apart from the social, economic, and strategic position of Egypt, it has a beauty that cannot be compared with, commonly known as the ancient civilization, land of the Nile and home of Pharaohs. Its civilization surpasses human knowledge through ancient ruins in Alexandria and the Pyramids the world is yet to find a way to construct. Egypt has  world-class Engineers demonstrated by its majestic architecture and magnificent bridges.

Libya is also a great country in its own rights. I have not had the privilege to visit but from what I have seen on television from journalists who have visited its well planned and organised, great infrastructure and roads through the desert and a great economy. Unlike Egypt, Libya is known for its no-nonsense principles and Mohamed Gaddafi’s fearlessness and outspokenness. He is a man of his own principles; does not run in packs like other African leaders; speaks out his mind and does not fear anyone.

He is accredited to be the first African leader to distort United Nations protocol through his long speech when he was the President of the African Union. He is credible despite what people might think of him. He is one of those leaders who has always advocated for a united Africa, through creating a strong African Union which could command respect in the world and a voice to reckon with. Apart from being a world leader, he has tried to create a better life for his citizens unlike other leaders who just horde wealth and save it in Swiss banks and embark in selfish unrealistic ventures and investments that create misery and misfortune for their citizens.

Gaddafi has guts other leaders do not have, like his refusal to the surrender the Locabie bombing suspects to be prosecuted; he eventually gave them up and paid compensation with Libyan money to victims and even negotiated the release of the sick jailed perpetrator and gave him a hero’s welcome when he was released. Proving his love and dedication to protect his citizens despite all odds, a trait other African leaders’ lack, our brothers and sisters are languishing in foreign prisons for crimes they have committed and not committed without representation because our foreign embassies are white elephants and toothless dogs, only there to protect our government interests and not citizens’ interests and wellbeing. Why is Gadaffi killing the same people he had the passion to protect before? What has changed? Are  they not the same Libyans he would move heaven and earth to save and protect?

What I see in all this chaos is the destabilization of strong African economies, silencing the mouth pieces that speak out against foreign aggression by attacking Egypt and Libya, because weakening these countries will destabilise and diminish not only North African power but the whole region.  You start with the strongest because the weak can do nothing.

Why can’t the Egyptians and Libyans see this outside interference? Is burning infrastructure and destroying economies our ancestors took centuries to build and our taxpayers’ money going to solve the problem. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know, if they don’t believe me they should look at, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia. In Iraq the Americans went to find weapons of mass destruction, in Afghanistan Osama Bin Laden, to date none has been found and these countries have become a nightmare. Is this the democracy they want; where homes are no longer safe to bring up children and people become prisoners in their own homes and decisions?

I urge my brothers and sisters to be careful of what they wish for and the hidden danger they cannot see  as a watchman as Prophet Isaiahs’ said and echoed in Martin Niemöller  (14 January 1892 – 6 March 1984) words;

THEY CAME….

First the Nazis came…
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out —
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out —
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me —
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Why can’t the Egyptians, Libyans and other people of Africans nations perceive this outside interference? People should vent their anger at the injustice, dictatorship and greed of our self-elected leaders who always rig their way to power and abrogate term of office.

Let’s not burn and destroy the infrastructure and economies our ancestors and our taxes have build for centuries just to quench our anger and frustrations. Presidents come and go but what is destroyed may never be rebuilt.

What Gadaffi and Mubarak and other African leaders should read are the signs of  time and know when to leave, as former British Prime Minister, John Major stated in his farewell speech ‘’When the curtain falls it’s time to leave the stage’’. Why is it so hard for African leaders to understand that absolute power corrupts? Despite the good things some of these great African leaders have done, it is good leave and be remembered for the good things they did and not the bad they are doing now, killing their own people who elected them and believed in them and whom they swore to protect.

Share
Posted on

Lessons From Tunisia, Egypt and Sudan

By Dr Said Adejumobi,  Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

‘What we want are bread, freedom and dignity’ – Egyptian demonstrator!

AS the ‘bigwigs’ of the PDP (Nigeria’s all conquering political party) gathered in Abuja in the second week of January 2011 (precisely Thursday, Jan. 13, 2011) to pick a presidential candidate for the party, two other important events were taking place simultaneously elsewhere on the continent.  In Tunisia, the ‘people’s power’ was at play in which what seemed to have been a minor incident triggered the pent-up anger of the people leading to the ousting of a 23-year political dictatorship of president Ben Ali. At the same time, in Sudan, a referendum was going on for the secession or otherwise, of the South of the country. As we now know, the results of both events in Sudan and Tunisia proved positive – the peoples’ power held sway. South Sudan has overwhelmingly voted for independence, which would kick off in July.

Barely did the torch of freedom light up in Tunis, the domino effect was felt in Cairo. Cairo’s popular Tahrir Square became the counterpoint of peaceful political resistance against a 30-year dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak, boosted by the West and sustained by an edifice of political repression. Eighteen days into the resistance – exactly on Friday, February 11, 2011, Hosni Mubarak made a shameful exit from power, ending the prospects of a Mubarak political dynasty, which he was nurturing.  Dictatorships by their internal logic are weak and cowardly – they require determined resistance to crack and disappear.

But what is the common denominator in the events in Tunisia, Egypt, Sudan and the presidential candidacy selection of the PDP in Nigeria?  All these events are about the acquisition, management, and mismanagement of political power and its consequences. The PDP may not be a one-man dictatorship, but it is an organised political dictatorship, which has ruled Nigeria for 12 years, and its principals boasting openly that whether the Nigerian people like it or not, they will rule the country for 60 years uninterrupted.  Unchecked political power in Tunisia, Egypt and Sudan, as it is in Nigeria, led to a culture of impunity in which the voice and vote of the people did not count; in which the leadership gloated and pretended that all was well; in which wisdom was absolutised by a few; and in which corruption flourished, unhindered.

The difference between Tunisia, Egypt, Sudan and Nigeria, is that for the former three countries, the process has run full cycle and the dare consequences have matured and unfolded; in Nigeria, the cycle is yet to be completed – the contradictions are fast building up, and the process of change is in incubation! As such, the recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and Sudan should be of interest to those who manage political power in Nigeria, especially the PDP, as an organised political force in the country.  There is major paradox in the cases of Tunisia and Egypt as the site of a peoples’ revolution in the 21st century in Africa. Both countries, though ruled with iron fist have recorded remarkable economic progress, with qualitatively better social and human conditions, incomparable with that of Nigeria or most Sub-Saharan African countries. These countries are amongst the few countries in Africa that are likely to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of halving poverty in their countries by 2015 – Nigeria is far from it!

Tunisia’s economy grew at an average of about  five per cent from the 1990s; inflation was squarely under control, and foreign direct investment flowed in. The World Bank in an assessment of the Tunisian economy in 2004, noted, “Tunisia has one of the fastest growing economies in North Africa and the Middle East since the mid-1980s. It has progressed from being a lower to a middle income country with a per capita income of $2,240”. Literacy rate in Tunisia is about 80% with the right of education codified in law in July 2002.  The percentage of six-year old in school was 99.2% in 2008/2009.  Female education and empowerment is a major priority in Tunisia.  The percentage of female students in secondary school was 58% and that in higher education – 60% in 2010.  About 30% of women occupy decision-making positions in the country. Under the country’s Code of Personal Status of 1956, polygamy was outlawed, and women given equal rights in marital relationships.

Health care services are free, qualitative, and accessible, while access to potable drinking water is about 94% and electricity about 99% for the population in Tunisia.  Given these indicators, life expectancy is very high in the country – 76.2 years for women, and 74.6 years for men, compared to the African average of about 42 years.  Tunisians live a much better life than Nigerians can ever imagine!

Egypt is not as lucky as Tunisia. Although its economy grew at an average of about 6% from 2005-2010, inflation rate was about 17% in 2009, while youth unemployment continue to soar. About 40% of Egyptians live on less than $2 per day. In spite of this, life is much better in Egypt than it is in Nigeria. Over 70% of Nigeria’s population lives in groaning poverty. Even as the demonstrations were going on in Tahrir Square, electricity was regular in the neighbourhoods.  Was it to be in Nigeria, all the protesters may have been shot by the police under the cover of darkness!  But the better living conditions in Tunisia and Egypt could not hold back the process of change.  Although bread may be available, freedom and dignity were absent!  The people fought to reclaim their freedom and dignity!

In Sudan, the people of Southern Sudan have existed as second class citizens in their country right from independence in 1956, and successive governments in Khartoum have cemented that.  Sudan like Nigeria has had a chequered political history with coups, military rule and counter-coups. Two major regimes, both of a military nature, have in succession dominated power in Sudan. The first is that of Colonel Gafaar Mohamed el-Nimeri who ruled from 1969-1985, and the second that of Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir, 1989-present.

These two leaders rather than reform Sudan, to erase the colonial legacy of divide and rule between the North and the South, exacerbated it. Religion, ethnicity and race were invoked as instruments of political legitimation, which furthered the marginalization of the South in national life. The consequence was a protracted civil war, which eventually ended with the signing of a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) on 9th January 2005 after three years of painful negotiations. A major part of the agreement is that after five years a referendum would be held for self-determination by the South. The assumption was that in five years the wounds would have been healed, mistakes corrected, and a united Sudan emerged.

This never happened! South Sudan has now completed its final rites of independence.

What are the lessons of Tunisia, Egypt and Sudan for Nigerian leaders? When the leaders deny their people bread, freedom and dignity, resistance and revolution are inevitable.  We rarely need the prophesy of an Atiku or the lamentations of a Ben Nwabueze to know that change is inevitable in Nigeria. But what we do not know is when, how, and in what shape and form the change would be?

Our leaders have planted the seeds of change in the society. Graduate unemployment in Nigeria is over 50%, poverty rate – of less than $2 per day is over 70%, basic infrastructures have completely collapsed – electricity, water, good roads, etc, there is general insecurity,  and an oil exporting country imports refined petroleum for its local use so that oil buccaneers can live off the sweet of the people. Nigeria runs perhaps the most expensive civilian government in the world – the National Assembly consumes significant percentage of the national budget; some past leaders, who were virtually broke before luck smiled on them with state power now own private jets that they travel in; and some others who have little or no knowledge about the oil industry now own oil wells, which they sell for raw cash. The picture is that of a jungle.

Power, as shown in Tunisia, Egypt and Sudan ultimately belongs to the people. It may take long but the people will invariably rescue it from their tormentors. If Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak had premonition about how things would turn out, they would probably have done things differently. Nigerian leaders have the opportunity to change course, initiate progressive reforms and restore hope for their people. If this is not done, there are signposts already of what the future holds for them!

This article first appeared in The Guardian (Lagos) 21 February, 2011.
Share
Posted on

Revolt in Egypt and Hysteria in Nigeria

The sustained mass revolt in Egypt, that eventually led to the resignation of Hosni Mubarak as President indeed caught the world’s attention while it lasted.

Taking a cue from Tunisia, the Egyptian revolt started albeit jokingly until it gained enough momentum to force out the ancient regime that had been in power for 30 years. One of the major fall outs of the Egyptian crises has been the latent insinuations in different parts of the world particularly Nigeria, on how an exact replica of the Egyptian situation could be staged in their climes. It has been intriguing listening to people in Nigeria serving notice to the status quo that a replica of the mass revolt in Egypt looks imminent in Nigeria.

Indeed the sight of young boys and people praying and protesting in front of Armored Personnel Carriers [APC] and defying the government of the day in the presence of tons of military hardware and artillery remains inspiring. But the Nigerian situation looks tragically different from the Egyptian situation.

It is quite easy for those who think the Egyptian mass revolt could take place in Nigeria, but they must be sincere and ready to ask a few questions and provide answers to them. The questions are

  • Are Nigerians sufficiently angry with the political and economic situation in the country?
  • Are the over 250 ethnic nationalities in Nigeria ready to jettison their multiple loyalties and go after a common enemy?
  • Is there an ideology or theoretical framework, available upon which any mass revolt is going to be built?
  • Is there a concrete post-mass revolt program available which can fill the void created by a mass revolt?
  • Are Nigerians ready to ignore the latter day spiritual mendicants that traverse the entire landscape in the country preaching the gospel of prosperity and confusing the populace that their misery is a result of the activities of the “devil” rather than the misrule of their rulers?

An honest answer to these posers could best gauge whether Nigeria is ready for a mass revolt.

Share
Posted on

How Far Will African Dictators Go to Quell The New Wave of Popular Uprising?

Protests in Algeria

African countries are going through a dynamic change, a change that the regimes cannot curtail even with the oppressive state apparatuses that have been employed over the years vehemently hold power. Two leadership casualties have been recorded so far; Ben-Ali of Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. These protests which regimes describe as social unrest are mainly driven by the use of the internet. Apart from the police brutality and killing of innocent protesters, the main tool with which these leaders are responding to these live demonstrations is the shutting down of the internet. Algeria’s President Abdul-Aziz Bouteflika and Moumah Ghaddafi are examples at point. Will shutting down the internet stop the revolt?

While the Algerians have been on the streets for a few weeks, their Libyan counterparts just joined the ‘wave of protest’ or revolution blowing across the continent. In Libya, Bengazi, one of Libya’s largest cities, is playing host to the uprising just like the Tahir Square in Egypt. The people of Libya have endured the reign of terror under president Ghaddafi in connivance with state security agencies for over four decades amidst numerous human right abuses. Suppression of opposition parties and silencing dissent voices has been the order of the day. But how long will Ghaddafi and his cohort continue to repress the popular uprising from same people they have maimed, traumatized and killed over the years?

One thing about these popular protests or revolution on the continent is their regional spread. The Maghreb states (Egypt not inclusive) that have been under the leadership of ‘Iron-fisted’ leaders are the most affected. The latest trend, however, shows a departure but the same message is the same as Tunisians and Egyptians gave to their erstwhile leaders: Reform government, Change your ways, Give us freedom.

The waves are gradually trickling down to other parts of Africa where people are experiencing similar inhuman conditions. This is a clear demonstration of the fact that basic human needs are the same: freedom and dignity, and that, African leaders are the same also. Therefore, I believe the popular uprising will leave no country untouched except the leaders learn fast to improve the condition of lives of the suffering millions and revitalize their economies, promote fair and balanced elections and respect election results as well as stop human-right abuses.

In line with Obama’s assertion in his speech in Ghana last year, ‘Africa does not need strong men; rather, it needs strong institutions’ that would bring the desirable development the people are yearning for’. African leaders who are not ready to shape their countries for good will be shown the way out by the people. The era of absolute dictatorship is gradually becoming extinct.

[ad#Adsense-200by200sq]

Share
Posted on

Why Are Democracies Contagious?

‘……man is created free but everywhere he goes he lives in chains….’ Rousseau’s remark about the pitfalls of modernization also serves as an adequate basis for extolling democracy as the best system of governance known to man. The inexorable spread of democratic practice can be attributed to many things such as the economic dominance of democratic states around the world. After all the US and its political allies in Europe, Asia, Latin America and even Africa have managed to take up the reins of economic power on the planet.

Every continent is economically dominated by democracies. Western European states such as Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain and many more are relatively better off than their eastern counterparts who are still recovering from the doldrums of communist rule and domination. The Bulgarias, Latvias, Moldovas are struggling to catch up and lest we forget only really started prospering after incorporating democratic practice into the political fabric of their changing societies.

Africa may be known for hardship and general social unrest but the emergence of democracies on the continent has proven to be a continental sedative. Nations such as Ghana, Cape Verde, Mali, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and the Mauritius who are beneficiaries of democratic political practice are economically better off than the non-democratic ones who continue to struggle with hybrid political systems that are mostly defined by political autocracy and military dictatorships. These methods of governance carry in their wake a massive abuse of human rights resulting in general economic despair and massive social unrest.

Everywhere in the world democracies generally flourish but does it explain the mass appeal of democratic governance around the globe? It could be argued that, China the world’s second largest economy is also not a democracy so surely alternative systems of governance can bring about national prosperity. The paroxysmal rise of democracies around the world however cannot be overlooked especially with recent events in North Africa. All across the Arab world monarchs and political leaders are beginning to worry as they marvel at extraordinary events in sister countries such as Tunisia where the erstwhile political autocrat Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was successfully overthrown by popular uprising.

The on-going effort by the people of Egypt to forcefully remove Hosni Mubarak is a continuation of what happened in Tunisia and the ripples may go even further in the Arab world. Former US President George W. Bush’s prediction that democratic forces will sweep across the Arab world with the right push is finally coming to fruition. Some have attributed this new political osmosis across the Arab world to the internet and online innovations such as twitter and facebook but the cause may go a lot further than that.

The call for political reform in Tunisia and now Egypt merely illustrates the philosophical adage that preceded this article. The intrinsic human will to be free is now being overtly expressed in nations that were hitherto immune to the spread of democratic governance. Democratic appeal lies not in its ability to generate income to its practitioners but rather in its ability to tap into the fundamental nature of man. The human desire to be free as expressed by Rousseau is instinctive so any political practice that fails to take this into consideration is bound to fail. The recent occurrences in the Northern part of Africa are a testament to this belief.

The Jasmine Revolution which started in Tunisia is expected or may inspire similar revolutions in Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Yemen and even Saudi Arabia. The French writer Albert Camus in one of his philosophical undertakings attributed the metaphysical revolt against God to the intrinsic human desire for freedom. In ‘L’homme Revolté’ (The Rebel), the famed author identifies two types of Revolutions. The one orchestrated by man against his maker and the type organised to oust earthly rulers such as monarchs and political despots. Both the metaphysical and physical revolutions are in consonance with the human call for freedom.

It must however be noted that, the metaphysical revolt against God resulted in the physical overthrow of monarchs in Europe for instance because political rule as a divine right seized to make sense leading to the outbreak of revolutions in countries such as France where monarchs ruled as a divine right. Liberté, égalité, fraternité, these words must resonate in every political system around the world for they are part and parcel of the human character which is why the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations identified democratic governance as a fundamental human right. States which therefore fail to subscribe to the basic tenets of democratic political systems are bound to experience some form of social unrest.

The call for freedom may not be immediate in non-democratic states but it can foment with time and explode with younger generations who feel disconnected from tradition and societal norms. This is so simply because in order to govern the modern man the nature of the ancient man needs to be respected and so far democracies have proven to be the only system of governance that empowers the citizenry to have a say in how they are going to be governed restoring in the process the natural human longing for freedom.

Share
Posted on

SELF PERPETRATION IN POWER BY AFRICAN LEADERS: LESSONS FROM EGYPT

By Abiodun Fatai

Why are African leaders fond of perpetrating themselves in power?  This has been the case with the late Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire, Mohammad Gaddafi of Libya, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Paul Biya of Cameroon, Kamuzu Banda of Malawi, former Ibrahim Babangida of Nigeria, Omar Bongo of Gabon and Laurent Gbagbo of Ivory Coast, among others. It is simplistic to answer that they are so endeared to the benefits of power and are always unwilling to vacate power when there is need for them to do so. African leaders have been in the habit of designing series of Maradonic and Machiavellian strategies for self perpetuation in power. Yet, it is true that they often forget that power is the only a matrix which has in itself potential for destruction. It is only in Africa that I have seen leaders dying in power or been disgraced from power, after they have refused to heed to simple voice of reason. They just love power. The experience in Europe and other developed societies really shown the willingness of leaders to vacate power when the ovation is loudest. Even at a slightest public disapproval, they show that power is not their personal property. This is not so in Africa; African leaders cherish power and see it as a private property.

The recent events and revolution in Egypt that eventually led to the forcing out of Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian President, after turbulent 18 days agitation and protest shows the sheer desperation of African leaders to sit-tight in power without heeding to the voice their people. A similar revolt had earlier taken place in Tunisia where President Zine El Abidine Ben Alli was ousted from power. This sheer desperation is only shrouded in the barefaced arrogance and insensitivity which some African leaders have continued to display against their people. Mubarak’s insistence further make the country ungovernable for 18 days with economic, political and social institutions completely suspended. The simple truism is that the period of the protest has no doubt fostered untold hardship on the Egyptians, which they are not likely to regain in due course.

In a similar manner, the former dictators such as General Sani Abacha of Nigeria, Mohammed Ghaddafi of Libya, Late President Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire, and Paul Biya of Cameroon, among others, showed lack of concern and desperation to continue to rule through autocratic disposition with little regard for thier people. The conviction and commitment of the Egyptians over the 18 days of protest depict their resolve to be free from autocratic rule and crass disregard for the plight of humanity. Professor Ben Nwabueze was more poignant when he claimed that “which is driven by the people and their faith in human freedoms? There is no universally prescribed method of revolution, but where the quality of human life is trampled upon and the people’s rights are routinely abused, the people as a collective have a duty to stand up and declaim: “Never again!”

The Egyptians resolve was therefore not unfounded because it was as the result of many years of suppression, brutality, and denial of right and alienation. In spite of what Dr Reuben Abati called the myth,  for example, that religion is a binding factor that makes the Middle Eastern population easier to control and dominate, Egyptians have defied this odd by choosing to fight for their freedom from the manacles and shackles of oppression. The aftermath of the revolution has dubbed it a historic change and has been welcomed from across the world. The EU, US, Germany and UK have all reacted positively  claiming the resolve of the Egyptians have been justified and that it is an historic change capable of catapulting the country  from authoritarian regime to civilian and democratic order.

What lessons are there to be learnt from the revolt in Egypt? What happened in Egypt is a clear lesson to the West, especially United States. It also sounds a clear but unequivocal warning to sit-tight African leaders that their days are numbered. As for the West, it is a lesson that they have to grind their teeth because the Egyptian revolution has caught them in the dilemma of their own logic. When you implicitly support autocratic government for the clear reason of protecting your interest at the behest of the people sovereign in their country, then what you gain is the Egyptian revolution. The west must urgently rethink and learn the lesson. As for the sit-tight African leaders, although it is not clear whether other Africans like the Egyptians have the orientation and the consciousness displayed by the Egyptians in the Egyptian revolution, the truth however is that it is unpredictable when a revolution would be ripe like this. Nevertheless, if the Northern African people most of whom have been dominated and controlled with religion can stage such protest to oust their President, then what happened in Egypt is capable of happening elsewhere. There is certainly a limit to how long the people can be oppressed. The scenario in Egypt and Tunisia therefore serves a serious warning for sit-tight leaders and perpetrators in power.

Abiodun Fatai is a Lecturer in Political Science at the Lagos State University, and a PhD Candidate at the University of Ibadan, Nigeria

Share
Posted on

Political Technology and Technological Politics

Political Technology and Technological Politics

The recent ‘people’s revolt’ against the ousted President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt started on facebook and twitter. Politics and all its contents and discontents now find relevance mostly on the internet. In fact, no web attention, no politics. Politicians have also seized the opportunity of technology to promote their ideas and raise awareness about their policies. President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria made his first declaration to contest 2011 elections on the Facebook. We should have known that the time would come when ‘techno-democratic forces will drive silent revolutions across the globe’ (Tunde Oseni The Economist, 19 June, 2008).

This is the era of political technology (not necessarily in the Michel Foucault way please) and technological politics! It reached the peak when, for the first time in history, a presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, as he then was, raised a youth-focused campaign from Chicago to reach the nooks and crannies of the United States. Obama literally started it!

Not only was Senator Obama able to use the internet as a political technology, he also changed the way and manner politics was played. For the first time, a presidential candidate raised millions of dollars via the internet. With oratory prowess and a highly electrifying message of change and hope, Senator Obama changed the face of politics. Before other candidates could realize the power of politics in technology and the power of technology in politics, Obama had raced over. While they were too busy with the old idea of political marketing, Mr Obama had raised several volunteers and foot soldiers from millions of facebooking and twittering youths. While his opponents were using analogue, Mr Obama had gone digital.

Digital democracy is now moving fast across the world. The internet is now the most important tool of politicking. Those who want to catch the majority of their constituents, which in most cases are the youths, have come to terms with the inevitable use of the internet. It is no longer enough to have good ideas; you have got to sell them digitally. It is no longer enough to claim follower-ship; you have got to tell us online. Leaders are now seen in the image which the internet users create for them. No doubt, the cyberspace is limited in developing countries, and could be a very rowdy space for cacophonous views and counter-views, but the cyberspace has come to be a very significant avenue for democratic political mobilization.
[ad#Adsense-200by200sq]

Share