Posted on

The Twisted African Democratic Revolutions

Special Feature/African Democracy                 

Either in Libya, Nigeria, Chad, Egypt or Tunisia, the African nation-state, from its birth, has been in some sort of undeviating inanimate democratic revolution. The reason is that the African state, as a political entity, is yet to have everlasting grip with the African nation, as a community, hence the almost constant schisms and the revolutions. African revolutions occur not because of the African community, which is intact, but the African state, which is unbalanced and unreflective of Africans’ innate democratic feelings.

Upheavals against colonialism for independence aside, post-colonial Africa’s bad leadership, endemic corruption, poor governance, horrific tyrants and dictatorships, and generally unstable domestic authority structures have put African states in almost permanent revolutions for democratic order. Hard questions abound as to when the revolutions will end and democratic institutions set up.

As I witnessed as a teenager during the 1979 Rawlings revolution, revolution can bring momentary joy to a people who are depressed from bad political leadership and economic shortages. Ghana witnessed this under the Kutu Acheampong military junta, which also described itself as revolutionary. Doug Saunders, of the Toronto-based The Globe And Mail, writing about world revolutions following the Egyptian, Libyan and the Tunisian revolutions, explains that, “The joy of revolutions is that they make ordinary life interesting. Suddenly, the streets glow with importance; anything seems possible.”  Under such atmosphere, the state, of which the revolution is about, fades into the background momentarily.

In either Jerry Rawlings’ Ghana or Idi Amin’s Uganda or Samuel Doe’s Liberia, almost all the African revolutions share the basic belief that life will be better for the average African. Against these beliefs is the fact that not all the African revolutions are the same, coming in diverse contours.

While the Idi Amin revolution saw him turn Uganda into a primitive enclave with roughly constant chaos and Uganda later saved by the amalgam of Julius Nyerere’s Tanzanian army and Ugandan freedom fighters, Mobutu Sese Seko effectively destroyed the traditional institutions (by deeper meaning, the soul of the country) of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and left the DRC virtually soulless with almost continuous cataclysms, especially in the eastern and northeastern parts.

Experts explain that what ring constantly in revolutions are the human possibility, that what was previously thought of as unimaginable becomes imaginable, that what was thought of as rotten could be overthrown and something fresh could be sown. Doug Saunders inferred of revolutionary traditions globally that, “Even when” revolutions are “sidetracked or seized, the seeds planted by a democratic revolution remain in the ground.”

The African who has gone through revolutions will tell you that their revolutions have turn out to be mostly disappointments than contentment. However, as Ghanaians and Nigerians will tell you today, out of this disenchantments are emerging democratic order from the democratic seeds planted by the various democratic revolutions. Jeff Goodwin, a sociologist at New York University, discussing the nature of revolutions following the Libyan, Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions, is quoted by Joe O’Connor, of the Toronto-based National Post, as saying revolutions “ … are a complex genus with different species.”

The insurgent-ridden African Great Lakes Region aside, Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF) is a typical African case of revolution that went mad. But out of its ashes democracy and good governance are flowering in Sierra Leone. The RUF revolution against the rots of the long-running Siaka Stevens’ autocratic one-party system, later carried on by Joseph Saidu Momoh, turned out to be exceptionally fatal. The RUF amputated Sierra Leoneans limbs, turned girls into prostitutes, looted diamonds, fire-bombed properties, practiced cannibalism, and frequently carved the initials “RUF” on their child soldiers’ chest. RUF officers rubbed cocaine into the open cuts on their troops to make them maniacal and fearless, and for entertainment, some RUF soldiers bet on the sex of an uborn baby and then sliced open a woman’s womb to determine the winner.

Still, and as Samuel Doe’s Liberia revealed, some African revolutions have turned out to be unimaginable, sending the likes of the Liberian or the Ivorian state into flames. Some African revolutions endings are worse than the previous conditions the revolutionaries sought to correct. Jerry Rawlings’ revolution, initially seen by some Africans as “enlightened,” saw the execution of some Ghanaian military junta leaders, mainly for their alleged corruption and moral ineptitude (The Rawlings coup d’etat had more to do with the rot within the military establishment than the Ghanaian society).

But Rawlings’ almost 20 years in power became perverse and saw Rawlings and his associates amassed more wealth than all those they had killed. At present, most of Rawlings and his associates’ children and families live high lives (sometimes bordering on ostentation), attended pricey schools abroad (and still do) and had medical treatment abroad (and still do). In Rawlings’ revolution, perhaps Africa’s most high profile because of the high profile killings, the new reality is that the revolution didn’t live up to its hype. Like most African revolutions, corruption was the Rawlings revolution’s first mission, but his regimes grew up to lack accountability and transparency. The regime also suppressed freedoms that resulted in the famed “culture of silence,” where Ghanaians were afraid to talk freely for fear of either being killed, imprisoned or disappearing.

Nigeria also went through numerous military juntas that hypothetically had sought to revolutionarize the Nigerian society and make life better for Nigerians. Though this did not happen, out of this cycles came enviably anti-corruption institutions such as the amazing Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) set up in 2003 to tackle endemic graft. Despite top flight killings, the Rawlings regimes were sadly short of this.

In the Rawlings’ revolution, Africa witnessed that high-tension sloganeering didn’t translate into reality. Jeff Goodwin, is cited by Joe O’Connor, as explaining that, “Countries generally have revolutions because they are in bad situation, and revolutions don’t always get you out of that hole … Revolutions happening in poor authoritarian countries, well, those countries usually end up remaining poor and authoritarian.”

In Equatorial Guinea, Francisco Macías Nguema revolution of some sorts turned out more lethal than thought of and nobody knew what kind of regime was going to come out of the terrible mess. Tapping into traditional African irrational supernatural believes, Macias forced Equatorial Guineans to believe that he has supernatural powers. That he can change into a cat, a dog, a mouse or any other animal or object, or vanish into thin air. Macias used the knowledge of witchcraft he inherited from his sorcerer father and built a huge collection of human skulls (from most of the people he has killed) at his homestead to hypnotize Equatorial Guineans into supernatural submission. Macias believed he was some sort of God..

In December, 1975, in a bizarre episode Macias killed 150 alleged coup plotters to the sound of a band playing Mary Hopkin’s tune Those Were the Days in the national stadium in Malabo, the capital. The estimations are that over 100,000 people, approximate one-third of Equatorial Guineans then, were either killed or fled into exile during Macias’ reign. In 1979, Macias was overthrown violently by his nephew Teodoro Obiang Nguema, the current President.  Macias was later executed in a firing squad. The situation today in Equatorial Guinea isn’t more or less better than Macias’ time.

Despite the fact that most African revolutions turn out to be sadness, there are few that are sunnier and bring regime changes. Out of the Valentine Strasser and the Maada Bio revolution came the flowering of democratic tenets and good governance in Sierra Leone born out of the bloodshed of the 11-year civil war. There may be some political and development challenges in Sierra Leone today but the hope is that in the long run, democratic values and good governance will survive for the greater progress of the country.

Helpless African betting on Jerry Rawkings, Samuel Doe, Jean-Bedel Bokassa, Lansana Conteh, Sani Abacha, among others, have been the African way of attempting to change the recurring appalling leadership and generally trembling domestic power configurations. Most African revolutionary outcomes have been largely the African elites fighting for political and material power while the average African languishes in poverty and unfreedoms.

For almost 42 years, Libyans had no freedoms and lived in fear. Libyans could be either killed or imprisoned anytime despite Muammar Gaddafi professing that his much-trumpeted revolution is to free Libyans from the tyranny of King.Muhammad Idri 1. Still, notwithstanding The Green Book (that sought solutions to the problems of democracy and economics) and the People’s Committees (that sought to upgrade the authority of the Libyans), Gaddafi and his associates, for 42 years the privileged few, not only dreadfully controlled Libyans but the principles and institutions of government did not become egalitarian – institutions like the police and the military were ruined, making Gaddafi look for mercenaries when the freedom fighters came calling six months ago.

More seriously, Gaddafi and his The Green Book were allergic to liberal democratic ideals. These are insults to the intelligences of contemporary Africans’ on-going fight for democratic revolutions that sought for free press, good governance, freedoms, human rights, social justice, equality, choices, free speech and good governance. In the absence democratic ideals, Gaddafi and other African tyrants are consumed in tyrannies and dictatorships that have put Africa states in almost unending revolutions for democratic order and good governance.

Unlike Rawlings and Lansana Conteh revolutions, the Egyptian and Tunisian revolutions show that non-violent social networking, via social media, is becoming the order of the day in Africa’s democratic revolutions. This made tyrants like Hosni Mubarak and Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali turn into sand in matter of weeks, with virtually no resistance. Fear or a “culture of silence” vanishes into thin air. Egalitarianism, choices, elections, democratic tenets, good governance, merits and issues replace the God-has-predestined-me-to-rule syndrome.

With their increasing grasp of social media, these are Africans shining age of their democratic revolutions backed by the increasingly influential African diasporan networks. The era of the old school African revolutionaries picking up arms, standing on armour cars and sloganeering, waving AK47s and their fists, and blasting out the African dictatorships are out.

In come non-violent protests and social networking sites such as Facebook, internet forums, web blogs, social blogs and microblogging such as Twitter, collaborative projects such as wikipedia, podcast, content communities such as Youtube, photgraphy or pictures, video, email, instant messaging, rating and social bookmarking are the key tools of today’s African democratic revolutionaries and not AK47s, Kalashnikov, military tanks and hot-headed sloganeering. The “cascading dominoes,” as Joe O’Connor of the Toronto-based National Post argues, “are characteristic of a revolutionary age. Europe went crazy for liberal democracy in 1848, in a tide of mostly fruitless revolutions … And when the Berlin Wall came down in 1989, it took communism with it, a mass combustiom of authoritarian governments often miscast as a spontaneous event.”

Despite the instant power of new media, some experts argue that generally revolutions start in simmering ways before erupting. The Liberian revolution came about because of long years of oppression of native Liberians (the “country people,” as they are called locally) by the Americo-Liberians, who believed they are more civilized than the native Liberians. For decades, the native Liberians were oppressed and effectively made second-class citizens on their own land. A triggering moment happened and Samuel Doe and his associates seized the time.

Like most African democratic revolutions, the Liberian revolution wasn’t any specially planned event, it was largely meaningless flare. So the Liberian revolution happened, it didn’t just happen, as Jack Goldstone of George Mason University would have argued, as he did of the nature of revolutions in the world. Samuel Doe and his associates quickly realize its “game on and there is no turning back” in attempting to clare out the autocratic Americo-Liberian oligarchy.

There may be twists in Africa democratic revolutions and experts may argue that it may be easier to know when revolutions start than when they end, but Sierra Leone, Liberia, Nigeria, Ghana, Mali and Uganda point to the reality that African democratic revolutions will eventually move into the direction of real democracy and good governance under the current continental and international atmosphere. There are no two ways about this.

If you like this article, I’d recommend my book “If I Was Famous, I’d Have a Lot to Say”

Share
Posted on

The Loud Silence on The Situation in Swaziland

Today marks the 38th anniversary when King Sobhuza II suspended Swaziland’s independence Constitution and banned the existence of political parties in the country’s political life. Labour unions, students and civil society organisations have planned what they hope to be the mother of all protests to mark the event. Inspired by the events in Tunisia and Egypt Swazis hope to achieve nothing less than the realisation of full democratic rights. The union’s much anticipated protest may however be interrupted by the government’s announcement that the anticipated protest is illegal and “anyone who (goes) ahead with the protests would be “dealt with in accordance with the laws of the country”. Reports of the arrests of union leaders and journalists earlier in the day are but a few of the examples that indicate what the Swazi regime is capable of.  It remains to be seen whether the people of Swaziland who have suffered for years at the hands of King Mswati III will finally have the courage to demand their long awaited liberation. It is again not clear what impact this attempt at demanding greater freedoms for the people will have on the politics of Swaziland generally. The jury is still out. Nevertheless, irrespective of how the protests turn out it is encouraging to see that Swazi people have not entirely lost the fighting spirit that recently helped the people of Tunisia and Egypt to remove their own dictators from power.

Swaziland is the last absolute monarchy in Southern Africa. If the country ever experienced some sort of democracy it must have been in the first five years after independence. By 1978 the then king had suspended the independence constitution, dissolved parliament, and had introduced the state of emergency. His argument was that the constitution and political parties were incompatible with Swaziland’s traditional practises and way of life. When the King died his son King Mswati III took over the throne at the age of 18 years and together with his advisors and the mighty royal Dlamini clans has ruled the country without any attempt to change the status quo.  In 2005 a new Constitution was approved by Swaziland’s Parliament to end the constitutional crisis created by the suspension of the independence constitution. However, the new Constitution vest powers in the hands of the monarchy, and King Mswati III still retain powers “to dissolve parliament and government, dismiss and appoint members of the judiciary and act as head of both police and army”.

King Mswati III known internationally for his flamboyant lifestyle and a great taste for expensive cars is together with his 13 wives accused of negligently using the public purse to maintain the royal family’s expensive standard of living. This happens in a country with the highest number of poor people and frightening statistics on HIV/AIDS. Without doubt Swaziland’s current situation demands that its people combine efforts in pushing away the frontiers of poverty while demanding greater freedoms from the Swazi regime. It is at times like these that serious questions need to be asked. What have the world done to help Swazi people?  While SADC sends delegations to Zimbabwe, Ivory Coast and recently Libya what has it done for Swaziland? SADC recently took a tough stance against Zimbabwe to the annoyance of President Robert Mugabe but its silence on Swaziland has been too loud. One can ask the same questions of the United Nations. There is simply world silence on Swaziland. The world has not only forgotten the plight of Swazi people, it has ignored and turned a blind eye to their situation. South Africa, the region’s economic hub has remained silent as well with only the unions highlighting the plight of Swazi people. South Africa’s painful past demands that it speaks out on what is happening in Swaziland. South Africa cannot fully enjoy its new democratic dispensation if its neighbours worship with impunity undemocratic practises which have no place in the modern era. South Africa and SADC needs to live up to their responsibilities in the region. Swazis have a role to play as it is they who can change their own circumstances. It is through a democratically elected and accountable government that Swazis can have their human dignity restored.

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

Egypt/Zimbabwe: Zimbabweans Cannot Outsource Their Revolution (opinion)

Jacob Dlamini

 Johannesburg (South Africa) – The year is only 34 days old and already it has seen the absolute demise of one dictatorship (Tunisia), the near collapse of another (Egypt), the rattling of a third (Jordan), the likely ruin of a fourth (Yemen) and the possible failure of a fifth (Algeria). That, by any measure, is a good start to what may be the most fundamental political change in the Middle East since 1948, when the state of Israel was founded.

The drama of the past 34 days was enhanced by the fact that two of the dictatorships either to fall (Tunisia) or flirt with downfall (Egypt) were, until recently, considered, especially by the US government, the most stable and least likely to fall.

In fact, US strategy in the Middle East has rested largely on an expensive peace between Egypt and Israel bankrolled by the US. It is largely because of this peace, brokered by former US president Jimmy Carter back when he occupied the White House, that Egypt is one of the top three recipients of military and other aid from the US, after Israel. The peace rested on a firm understanding between the Americans, Israelis and Egyptians, whose state is the largest and most politically significant in the Middle East, that the other Arab-led dictatorships in the Middle East posed little existential threat to Israel so long as Egypt honoured its side of the Camp David agreement.

But Egypt now looks likely to fall, meaning Egypt as we know it could change dramatically as Egyptians, fed up with corruption, neglected by a statistically impressive but empirically hopeless economy, and fed up with a leader, Hosni Mubarak, who seemed to think he was fated by history to rule, take to the streets to demand his ousting.

But it is not only Mubarak’s Egypt that is likely to go into the proverbial dustbin of history. The US policy of making nice with Mubarak while ignoring his brutality against his political opponents and, occasionally, using Mubarak’s apparatus of repression for the “rendition” and torture of enemy combatants, will also have to change.

The last thing the US wants is to, again, find itself backing the wrong side in the wave of protests sweeping the Middle East. The US made that mistake by backing a coup against a democratically elected government in Iran in the 1950s, supporting Saddam Hussein and even plying him with arms in the 1980s while he fought against the hated ayatollahs of Iran, and abandoning, in Afghanistan, the mujahedeen, who had helped the US give the hapless Soviets a taste of Vietnam. That is why the US has been treading gingerly on this. That is why US President Barack Obama has been frantically trying to sound allied to both prodemocracy protesters and Mubarak at the same time. Obama wants to be able to claim some credit should Egypt be delivered finally from dictatorship.

But what is the lesson of the recent events for southern Africa? In particular, what lessons does the wave of protests sweeping the Middle East have for Zimbabweans?

The most important lesson to come out of Egypt and Tunisia, it seems to me, is that revolutions cannot be outsourced. There has been something rather obscene about the ways in which some human rights activists, Zimbabwean and non-Zimbabwean, have presented the problems in Zimbabwe as if they are entirely SA’s or, to be exact, Thabo Mbeki ’s. One got the impression sometimes that these activists wanted Mbeki and South Africans in general to march on Harare. Some even suggested SA invade Zimbabwe.

What these hysterical calls did was absolve the prodemocracy movement in Zimbabwe of the responsibility to take the lead in the fight against Robert Mugabe’s dictatorship. Why is it, for example, that none of us who want to see Mugabe out of office and on trial for all sorts of crimes have bothered to ask why the Movement for Democratic Change, whose roots are supposedly in Zimbabwe’s labour movement, has yet to organise a successful strike, stayaway or other form of popular protest?

None of this is to ignore the brave men and women, journalists, lawyers, farmers and ordinary citizens who have protested against Mugabe’s rule and paid with everything from their lives to their limbs and property. The actions of these people must be recognised and honoured. But they cannot and should not be the exception.

Zimbabweans cannot outsource their revolution. They cannot leave the fight for their freedom to others. Sure, they need support, solidarity and the knowledge that the rest of the world is on their side. But they cannot expect the fight to be led by outsiders. That, for me, is what the Egyptians and the Tunisians have taught us.

Mubarak has one of the most formidable repressive machineries in the world but that has proved worthless in the face of popular protest. Voting with their feet, as the millions of Zimbabweans have done by moving to SA, Zambia, Botswana, Canada, Australia, the US and the UK, must have been a difficult thing to do. But it is by no means courageous. Courage is staring down a dictator, telling him to go and standing your ground. That is what the North Africans have done. Let us hope Zimbabweans learn from them.

*Jacob Dlamini is a South African writer.

Share
Posted on

The African Uprising

FERNY NARH

The African is always left in the dark whiles decisions pertaining to his or her well being are taken by unknown forces. We are then forced to accept because the interest of our leaders has already been secured. I feel no less for my fellow Africans because I am also a victim of the unjustifiable rule or governance we are experiencing these days. Many at times I think and ask why this transpires in this era and I am not made better by this because less and less will my efforts be when I strive for the best.

Recent developments, I think, are a must because the ordinary citizen must realize the politician in whose arms he has devoted his well being. African leaders have for a long time taken Africans for granted and have rather improved their well being and assets. This has been the situation for a long time and it took the courage of just one individual to tell the masses that their lives were being toiled with by these politicians.

I stand to salute this great hero because I do believe in equality and justice for all and this is exactly what the young man proved. I foresee a day when Africa will rise and demand for her fair share of the national cake and the Tunisian uprising has turned the clock towards that direction, and when that day comes, I believe nothing will stop the masses.

This is an opportunity for the governments of African states to be responsive to the aspirations of the African, yet I see no sign of that. They rather put in forces to halt the voices of the masses. Egyptians have spelt out their plight but the best Mr. Mubarak can do is to put bans on protests and gatherings. This can’t stop them from crying out; it won’t keep them from shouting. The dawn of African revolution is about to begin and I advice African leaders to pay heed to the cries of the citizens because we are the voice of God.

Share
Posted on

North Africa: Dispirited Arabs Burning for Change

Inter Press Service (IPS), by Cam Mcgrath

Cairo (Egypt) — Upset over a policy that prevented him from buying subsidised food, Egyptian restaurant owner Abdou Abdel Moneim travelled to Cairo to find someone in parliament to help.

When security officers prevented him from submitting his complaint to MPs entering parliament, the 49-year-old man doused himself in fuel and cursed the Egyptian regime as he disappeared into a ball of fire.

Abdel Moneim survived with severe burns to his legs and face, but by the end of the day similar incidents had occurred in three different North African countries. In the past week, nearly two dozen attempted self-immolations have been reported across the Arab world, three of them fatal.

The horrifying public suicide attempts echo the iconic act of Mohamed Bouazizi, a 26-year-old Tunisian who set himself on fire in mid-December after police confiscated the produce cart he was using to make a living. Bouazizi died weeks later of his burns, but his desperate act triggered protests that eventually led Tunisian president Zine Al-Abdine Ben Ali to flee the North African country he had ruled with an iron fist for 23 years.

Analysts say the Tunisian revolt has resonated with millions of Arabs living under repressive regimes who are frustrated with their difficult economic conditions and limited opportunities to improve their lot. Many are drawing parallels to the situation in their own country, and wondering if a similar uprising will take place.

It’s not surprising then that the heroic story of a vegetable seller whose horrific yet spectacular death brought down a tyrant has taken on an almost legendary flavour. But it may also be inspiring more tragic stories.

On Jan. 15, one day after the fall of Ben Ali, a 37-year-old Algerian man died after setting himself alight. Since then, at least 22 attempted self- immolations have been reported in Algeria, Mauritania, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

The suspected motive behind each incident has varied. One man was protesting corruption and injustice, another was reportedly upset at being unable to secure cheap housing, and two textile workers objected to their employer’s decision to transfer them to other departments.

“The self-immolations appear to be political acts,” says Michael Biggs, a sociologist at Oxford University. “These people may have personal grievances, but they’re clearly attributing those grievances to the political system. They may be thinking that ‘if Bouazizi can set himself on fire and precipitate a massive, popular uprising then why can’t I to resolve my problem?'”

According to Biggs, incidents in which protestors deliberately set themselves on fire are extremely rare, “but much less rare than people might think.”

Since the 1960s, over 1,000 cases of self-immolation have been recorded in more than 25 countries worldwide. It often occurs in waves and is most prevalent in India, Vietnam and South Korea, which account for more than half of all cases.

There are examples of Kurdish nationalists setting themselves on fire during protests in Europe in the 1990s, but until now the practice has not been common in the Muslim world, possibly due to Islam’s strong prohibition of both suicide and cremation.

“It’s mostly an Eastern practice. In Buddhism and Hinduism burning has a more sacred character and is an accepted form of disposing of dead bodies, so it’s not the terrible thing as we think of it in Christian and Muslim religious traditions,” Biggs told IPS.

The spectacle of a fiery death can be highly effective in focusing world attention on a cause or injustice. A photograph of Thich Quang Duc, the elderly Buddhist monk who immolated himself in the middle of a busy intersection in Saigon in 1963, became one of the iconic images of the Vietnam War. It was also instrumental in turning the tide of U.S. public opinion against the war.

The brutal act of setting oneself on fire usually elicits reactions of shock and horror, but also sympathy, Biggs explains. It has been utilised as a political form of protest by South Korean labour activists, Czechs opposed to Soviet occupation, and by upper-caste Indians, among others.

“Bouazizi’s is probably the most successful example,” he says. “The Tunisian government fell very quickly because his one action inspired many other people to go into the streets. It was also successful in South Vietnam in the 1960s, but it took five months and six monks and a nun to die before the regime was overthrown.”

The historical efficacy of self-immolation protests may be one reason Arab officials and state media have attempted to portray the series of “copycat” suicide attempts as the non-political acts of opportunistic and mentally unstable individuals.

“Suicide has become a fad and is being used for blackmail,” declared Egyptian state-run newspaper Al-Akhbar, deriding a man who reportedly threatened to set himself on fire after his request for public housing was repeatedly turned down.

Arab governments have appealed to religious leaders to stress Islam’s injunctions against suicide in order to discourage Muslim youth from taking their own life. Imams at state-monitored mosques in Egypt and Algeria condemned self-immolation during their weekly sermons on Friday, claiming suicidal thoughts stemmed from a lack of faith.

Al-Azhar, the highest authority in Sunni Islam, issued a statement last week reaffirming that suicide violates Islam even when it is carried out as a social or political protest.

“Islam categorically forbids suicide for any reason and does not accept the separation of souls from bodies as an expression of stress, anger or protest,” its spokesman said.

Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of Egypt’s outlawed Muslim Brotherhood, had a different take on the state-endorsed message. In a statement the influential cleric urged Arab youth to honour the sanctity of life, blaming repressive regimes for conditions that have driven them to despair.

“Dear young men, take care of your life because it is a great bounty from Allah, and do not set yourself on fire as it is the tyrants who should burn. Be patient, endure and be steadfast. Tomorrow will come soon enough.”

Share