urn:mashada-com:feeds:atom Mashada Blogs » Paza Sauti Mashada Blogs » Paza Sauti 2009-11-21T08:01:32-05:00 http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/11/why-africa-welcomes-chinese.html Paza Sauti: Why Africa welcomes the Chinese 2009-11-07T16:44:00-05:00 2009-11-07T16:44:00-05:00
There is a debate among geopolitical and economic commentators about the merits of Chinese versus western involvement with Africa. One argument is that Chinese investment is exploitative and undermines the development of democracy and human rights on the continent. Others view the matter in terms of competition, arguing that China is encroaching on the decades-long monopoly of the west over Africa's natural resources.

Neither of these viewpoints addresses the core issues. First, major players in global investment and development are discussing Africa without engaging its people as equal partners. Second, Africans are not seen to be proactive in setting their own priorities and terms of engagement.

Development aid, fashioned on this skewed relationship, has long been a key source of income for the continent. While helpful, aid has not delivered sustainable development. It is clear that trade and investment bring greater opportunity for wealth creation. Africa welcomes investment, from the east and west, north and south, and Rwanda is no exception. We want investment that offers skills and jobs, encourages entrepreneurship, and provides the opportunity to improve millions of lives.

This call for investment and trade rather than traditional aid does not mean the latter's contribution to addressing poverty is not recognised. However, the fundamental problem with the current development aid practice is the danger countries face as they become perpetually reliant on handouts.

So what should those who give aid, and those who receive it, focus on? The primary purpose of aid should ultimately be to work itself out, leaving a positive legacy behind. Aid should also be used to create opportunities for trade, enhance self-sufficiency and assist with the development of a robust private sector to attract investment. In many countries, for example, aid offers resources such as fertilisers for free. The intention is good but this often prevents local businesses from being able to provide these goods competitively. Given the choice, people would prefer to work and provide for themselves, rather than receive charity. Africans want self-determination and dignity.

Our continent, like others, requires investment to further its development. Efforts to pursue this need not be seen as a threat to the strengthening of democracy. Of course, African leaders should take good governance and human rights seriously – and most do. This is not – and should not be – because anybody else tells us to, or in return for investment, but because it is the right thing to do. The presence of Chinese investment in Africa does not discharge governments of their responsibilities any more than its presence in the EU or US should erode human rights there.

In Rwanda, we have worked hard to tackle the root causes of corruption and ensure there is a strong case for attracting investment. This programme of reform is yielding results and has been recognised by the World Bank's 2010 Doing Business Index, which saw Rwanda jump from 143rd to 67th position in one year, making it the world's leading reformer. In 2008, Rwanda's GDP grew at 11.2%, and despite the global financial crisis our 2009 projections give us cause for optimism. Wages in key export sectors have grown more than 20% annually over the last eight years, and all these developments have occurred while the percentage of our national budget funded by aid has been reduced by half since 2001.

Ultimately, Africa's relationship with its international counterparts should be redefined. For too long, we have not been able to trade fairly with Europe and the US; trade barriers and subsidies, particularly in agriculture, have protected external markets from African products, hindering our ability to trade as equals. Investment and trade with willing countries, including intra-African trade, helps the continent to build a much-needed culture of entrepreneurship and development.

All would benefit if the world focused on increasing investment in Africa, and if Rwanda and the rest of the continent worked to establish more equitable international partnerships. A trade relationship built on this new approach would be more helpful in reaching what should be our common goal: sustainable development, mutual prosperity and respect.

Paul Kageme
President of Rwanda ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/10/httpwww.html Paza Sauti: [nt] 2009-10-23T20:39:00-04:00 2009-10-23T20:39:00-04:00 ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/10/kenyan-lable.html Paza Sauti: Ni Leboo Joo 2009-10-23T20:34:00-04:00 2009-10-23T20:34:00-04:00
The label acquired racist overtones when Barack Obama, whose father was Kenyan, won the US presidency, sparking emotional denunciations among the so-called birthers, who say Obama should not have competed for the presidency in the first place because he was allegedly not born in the US, and was in fact a Kenyan.

Last week, when Senator Olympia Snowe broke with fellow Republicans and voted with Obama in favour of health care reform, she came in for such a barrage of criticism from the right that a satirical blog, the Borowitz Report, carried a mock news story to the effect that she had been labelled “a Kenyan” by her party.

“This vote is going to raise suspicions, once again, that Sen Snowe was born in Kenya,” the blog purported to quote Republican Party chairman Michael Steele, adding; “We demand that she prove that she is definitely not Kenyan.”

The blog also purported to quote Orly Taitz, leader of the “birther” movement, as terming Snowe’s vote “textbook Kenyan” behaviour, because, “She’s putting her tribe first.” ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/10/what-they-dont-tell-you-about-rwanda.html Paza Sauti: What they don’t tell you about Rwanda 2009-10-03T19:47:00-04:00 2009-10-03T19:47:00-04:00
When I visited Rwanda at the request of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative to do a report on the state of human rights and democracy in Rwanda (in connection with Rwanda’s application to join the Commonwealth) my first impressions, despite some critical reports I had read, were favourable: Very efficient and courteous processing of incoming passengers, a safe, clean and well organised Kigali, and bright and suave officials.

However, I was put on guard when every non-official person I interviewed, diplomats, journalists, professionals, and local and international civil society officers, would not speak to me except on assurances of anonymity.

When I read the constitution, I found no mention of ethnic or religious groups, and came across legislation, which banned discussion of ethnicity (yet huge government posters reminded people of the "genocide against the Tutsi", although of course many Hutus had also been massacred). Those who imply that Kagame’s Rwanda Patriotic Front had killed Hutus unnecessarily are heavily penalised, as are those who question official accounts of the genocide. This hardly fits with Kagame’s advocacy of reconciliation, inclusion or coming to terms with the past.

Exiled hutus

Rwanda President Paul Kagame
Reading numerous reports of the UN Security Council, UNHCR or international NGOs, memoirs of some key Rwandan politicians and of the commander of the UN forces Romeo Dallaire, and scholarly literature, I learnt that, though of course the Tutsi had suffered greatly at the hands of a large number of Hutus, the RPF had also killed thousands of Hutus, and driven many to exile (and then pursued them in their countries of exile). Incoming Tutsi have appropriated Hutu owned land. When considered strategic, the RPF allowed the killing of Tutsis. Dallaire writes that their deaths can also be laid "at the door of the military genius, Kagame, who did not speed up his campaign when the scale of genocide became clear and even talked candidly with me at several points about the price his fellow Tutsi might have to pay for the cause". Kagame refused Dallaire’s proposal to accept ceasefire to stop the massacre, because it did not suit Kagame’s grand design of Tutsi hegemony. He has been quoted as criticising people who see the war in terms of human rights. He has said that some conflicts are good, "a sort of purification" which "erupt in order to make a real transformation possible".

The Rwanda regime relies on power structures that sometimes run parallel to, and sometimes crosscut, the formal government; and in which the army plays a central role. The country has relied heavily for its revenue (to fund its institutions and elite) on plunder of the mineral resources of the DRC.

Mode of extraction

It bears the primary responsibility for the political and economic instability in the Great Lakes Region (including the overthrow of the Congolese government), which is functional to its mode of extraction of wealth and its regional dominance.

It practises, and has contributed to, a complex, regional regime of illegal economic transactions, evasion of UN sanctions, arming of militias, criminal business organisations, and disregard of neighbours’ borders and fiscal systems, which has greatly impoverished the region.

The RPF has used an extraordinary amount of violence, domestically and internationally. It has killed several thousands Hutus, citizens and others, and is responsible for the deaths of even more through displacement, malnutrition and hunger. It has denied hundreds of thousands of children the opportunity of education, and deprived millions of family and community life. It has conscripted child soldiers. The UN has voluminously documented these practices and repeatedly chastised Rwanda for its irresponsible behaviour in the DRC. Beneath the gentility of RPF leaders, the tidiness of Kigali, and its gleaming high rise buildings, I found a country deeply fragmented, operating under the hegemony of a small Tutsi political elite, which rules through oppression and fear.

Effective Public Relations

I discovered that these leaders are extraordinarily effective at public relations, especially as directed at the West, and make the most of the guilt in the West for doing so little to prevent the terrible genocide in 1994, directed largely but not exclusively at the Tutsi.

[The report of the CHRI can be found at [www.humanrightsinitiative.org]

By Prof Yash Ghai
Prof Ghai is a former CKRC Chaiman ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/09/is-kenya-failed-state.html Paza Sauti: Is Kenya a failed state? 2009-09-22T21:22:00-04:00 2009-09-22T21:22:00-04:00
I suspect this statement may well inform the response to the public debate as to whether Kenya is a failed state or not.

From casual observation, one cannot fail to see that the political elite in Kenya froth at the mouth whenever anyone dares compare Kenya with her troubled neighbours such as Somalia or DRC. Such politicians use words like "we are a sovereign state" and "we have a duly elected government" to justify that we are not a failed state.

Rarely do the voices of the masses get the same publicity as those of the powerful elite on this debate or any other. It would be safe to say that politicians and wananchi would have converse opinions on the "failed state" debate because the two, metaphorically speaking, stand on different podiums and face different directions and therefore see and experience different "Kenya’s".

The term "failed state" is often used by political commentators and journalists to describe a state perceived as having failed at some of the basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government.

The Fund for Peace, United States-based think tank, uses the following attributes to characterie a failed state:

loss of physical control of its territory, or of the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force therein,

erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions,

an inability to provide reasonable public services, and

an inability to interact with other states as a full member of the international community.

On the other hand, the UK-based Crisis States Research Centre defines a failed state as a condition of "state collapse" that it can no longer perform its basic security and development functions and loses effective control over its territory and borders.

Since 2005, the Fund for Peace and the magazine Foreign Policy, publishes an annual index called the Failed States Index. The list only assesses sovereign states (determined by membership in the United Nations).

It has released this year’s Failed States Index. From a list of 177 failed states, Kenya is ranked 14th among the top 20. So if our politicians bothered to be informed they would realize that sovereignty does not exclude one from being a failed state as all 177 states named as failed states are all sovereign, some, like Somalia, with very impressive economic growth!

The index's ranks are based on twelve indicators of state vulnerability - four social, two economic and six political.

Social indicators include: Demographic pressures; Massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples; Legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievance; Chronic and sustained human flight.

Economic indicators include: Uneven economic development along group lines; Sharp and/or severe economic decline.

Political indicators include: Criminalisation and/or delegitimisation of the state; Progressive deterioration of public services; Widespread violation of human rights; Security apparatus as ‘state within a state’; Rise of factionalised elites; Intervention of other states or external factors.

Published on 19/07/2009

By Roseleen Nzioka ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/06/childish-things-childish-ways.html Paza Sauti: Childish things, childish ways 2009-06-20T17:47:00-04:00 2009-06-20T17:47:00-04:00 A wise man of the ancient once said " when I was a child, I did childish things. Now that I am a man, I have put away the childish and act like a man". I was in Kenya about a month ago, and during my visit two interesting events occurred. These were the live telecast of parliamentary proceedings and the verdict on the Tom Cholmondeley Delamere case.

These were both significant events in the history of the country, one heralding a new era of openness and maturity for the Kenyan society. While the other displaying our inability to deal with an old era, and its resulting diversity. We focused our attention on the narrow prism with which every Kenyan seems to define self, by - race, tribe, ethnicity, in evaluating guilt. However, inspite of these two momentous occurrence, I was intrigued by a different phenomenon, one more apparent and obvious. I watched the central figures of authority in these branches of government. And conspicuous on each head, the Speaker, Kenneth Marende and High Court Judge, Muga Apondi, both wore these hideous blonde wigs in what appeared to be either oblivion or pride.

When I was a child, I copied and aped a lot. I pretended to be my father, a policeman, a soldier and we made costumes that allowed us to look the part. I believe we called it 'kalongo'. This throw back to my childhood was an epiphany into the state of Kenya's maturity. We have a population looking at figures in authority with real expectations of life and death, however the leaders are playing the part aping some distant colonial era, some servant of the Royal British Empire. This lack of self awareness or knowledge of self was excusable in the 1960s, but 40 years later we are still playing 'kalongo' and acting the part.

Games have no accountability and the outcomes are not real. We have had vision 1995, 2000, 2010 and now 2030. These are words on paper, a script for a well choreographed play, where all the actors go back to their real lives after the curtain falls with a fat paycheck, nothing real.

Some will site tradition, and I am the biggest fan of tradition, however we must pause and ask ourselves whose tradition. We as Kenyans run the risk of playing the baffon, the joker, the jester at every court. Parallel to a colonial tradition we have a liberation tradition and too often we have honored the colonial over the liberation tradition in Kenya and to some extent Africa. Lake Victoria, Victoria Falls are just symbols of this immaturity, an inability to take full ownership of yourself.

We need to rediscover who we are and rekindle what our true values were and here is my short list of where we should start.

  • A new constitution that reflects the will and tone of the people to replace current one handed down by the British
  • Full ownership of our successes and failures - its the only way we will learn to do better
  • New land policy that honors indigenous land rights - otherwise what were the struggles for?
  • Renaming of all national symbols and land features
  • And finally getting rid of those UGLY WIGS
If you look at countries that have shared a liberation tradition - United States, India, South Africa - have all shed this semblance of a clingy undesirable past. Some how we seem to find it a convenient scapegoat. We blame every issue on the colonial era, we kill each other, steal land, even urinate in the streets and blame the colonial era. We need to stop the games, no more 'kalongo' this is realings we are way past 'tryzex' and 'mujaribu'. Or have we already lost our marbles?

]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/04/accord-constitution-have-no-answer.html Paza Sauti: Accord, Constitution have no answer 2009-04-28T16:33:00-04:00 2009-04-28T16:33:00-04:00

Honourable members, on Thursday, April 23, just as the House was about to resume the interrupted debate on the Motion for the approval by the House of the names of Members nominated to serve on the House Business Committee, the Member for Kisumu Town West, the Honourable John Olago-Aluoch, stood on a point of order claiming to raise an issue touching on the ability of this House to defend the Constitution. The Member noted that the Motion for approval of Members of the House Business Committee had been brought by the Honourable Vice-President as Leader of Government Business. He, however, sought to know from the Chair who under our Constitution is supposed to move the Motion.

Citing the definition of the ‘Leader of Government Business’ in the Standing Orders, which at Standing Order 2 is defined as "the Minister designated by the Government as the Leader of Government Business in the House" the Member posed the question: "Who is the Government in the context of the Kenyan situation?"

Olago-Aluoch went on to argue that ‘Government’ in the context of the Kenyan situation is defined by the Constitution and the National Accord and Reconciliation Act and that, considering the functions of the Prime Minister as set out in the Constitution, the inference from the Constitution and the National Accord is that the Leader of Government Business and the chairperson of the House Business Committee is a constitutional affair. It was the argument of the Olago-Aluoch that the Leader of Government Business ought to be the Prime Minister and that it would be unconstitutional for any other person to be the Leader of Government Business or the chairperson of the House Business Committee. He, thus, sought a Ruling from the Chair on these matters before the House could proceed.

Weighty Matter

The Chair took the view that the matters raised by Olago-Aluoch were weighty and decided to hear a few more contributions from Members before indicating the way to proceed.

Honourable Members, what followed was a barrage of learned and educated opinions by many Members canvassing various positions on the issues raised. In the process a number of Members also raised new issues which merit consideration and comment by the Chair. Some of the Members who gave opinion or raised issues include Honourables Mutula Kilonzo, James Orengo, Gitobu Imanyara, Kiraitu Murungi, Dr (Wilfred) Machage, Isaac Ruto, Uhuru Kenyatta, Charles Kilonzo, William Ruto, Walter Nyambati, William ole Ntimama, Abdul Bahari, Prof George Saitoti, Chris Okemo, Peter Munya, Elizabeth Ongoro, Dr Naomi Shaban, John Mbadi, Prof Sam Ongeri, Ababu Namwamba, Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o, Bifwoli Wakoli, Farah Maalim and George Thuo. This list is not exhaustive.

Honourable Members, you will recall that at the end of all the contributions, I delivered a communicationin which I among other things promised, without prejudice to the Ruling I undertook to deliver today, to seek direct audience with His Excellency the President and the Right Honourable Prime Minister with a view to bringing the matter of the constitution of the House Business Committee, its chairperson and the Leader of Government Business to a speedy and amicable conclusion. I also undertook to make known to this House, the results of that initiative. Indeed, I will do so in the course of this communication.

Speaker ill-equipped

Honourable Members, before I get to the heart of this Ruling, let me remind you of what I said on Thursday, 23rd April, 2009. I said then and I repeat now that the office of the Speaker of the National Assembly is singularly ill-equipped to advise on or determine for the for the Executive arm of Government, and, for that matter, political parties, how they shall run their affairs.

I further stated that the Speaker will limit himself to questions of constitutionality, statute and the Standing Orders, but only so far as these relate to the business and affairs of this House. I, therefore, want to make it clear from the onset that subject to these qualifications, I do not intend to traverse territory that is outside the province of my office.

Honourable Members, I have distilled the following issues from the points of order and contributions made:

a) What is the definition of the Government in the context of Standing Order No 2?;

b) Whether the Speaker having recognised or allowed the Vice-President to appear before the House as the Leader of Government Business, is estopped from entertaining any questions as to the legality or propriety of his incumbency as such;

c) Whether the House has any role in the nomination or determination of the Leader of Government Business;

d) Whether the Constitution, as read with the National Accord and Reconciliation Act, provides for who shall be the Leader of Government Business in this House;

e) How any inconsistency between the National Accord and Reconciliation Act and the Constitution, or for that matter the Standing Orders, is to be resolved;

f) What the Speaker is to do in the event that he receives two different letters from the same Government designating different persons as Leader of Government Business in the House;

g) Whether the House can remove a Leader of Government Business and if so by what procedure;

h) The procedure for nomination of the chairperson of the House Business Committee and whether the nominee of Government for chairperson is to be part of the list submitted to the House for approval or is additional to it;

i) Whether the House can proceed to approve the membership of the House Business Committee without regard to the question of who the Leader of Government Business or the chairperson of the Committee is.

Honourable Members, I seek your indulgence as the menu of issues for determination is very long. Allow me to pronounce myself as concisely as I can on each of these issues:

The first and probably the most important issue is the question of who or what constitutes the ‘Government’, for the purposes of the designation of a Minister envisaged under Standing Order 2. This issue was canvassed at length and is at the core of the present impasse.

Various documents were cited as providing the answer; including the Interpretation and General Provisions Act; Chapter 2 of the Laws of Kenya, the Constitution and the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. The simple question being asked is this: When the Standing Orders provide for designation of a Minister to be the Leader of Government Business in the House by the Government, who is envisaged to make that designation?

Honourable Members, the position of Leader of Government Business exists in virtually all Parliaments in the Commonwealth. There are, however, no hard and fast rules as to who shall hold that office. In some jurisdictions, the matter is expressly provided for in the Constitution, while in others it obtains by statute or the standing orders. The following few examples shall illustrate this point:

No Universal Rule

In the Republic of Ghana, the Leader of Government Business is not specifically provided for in the Constitution and the holder of that office need not be a Minister. In fact, today, the Leader of Government Business in the Parliament of Ghana is not a Minister. He is not a member of Cabinet and cannot lay a paper in the House on behalf of a Minister.

In the Republic of Uganda, pursuant to Article 108A of the Constitution, the Prime Minister is designated as the Leader of Government Business in Parliament. In the United Republic of Tanzania, under the Constitution, the Prime Minister is appointed by the President and is the Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly and has authority over the control, supervision and execution of the day-to-day functions and affairs of the Government.

In the Republic of South Africa, the President appoints the Leader of Government Business in Parliament. In democracies with a longer history such as the United Kingdom and India, the Leader of Government Business is designated by the Prime Minister who is the Head of Government. There is, therefore, no universal rule of general application in this matter.

Honourable Members, in Kenya, the office of the Leader of Government Business is recognised and defined only in the Standing Orders. The position as defined in the Standing Orders must be construed, not generally, but only in the context of the National Assembly. The holder is the Leader of the Business of the Government only for the purposes of the House.

National Accord

The phrase ‘Leader of Government Business’ is not, to my knowledge, to be found anywhere in the Constitution or in the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. The position is not established by or under any other statute. It follows that neither the Constitution, nor any statute has provision on the appointment of the Leader of Government Business in the House.

In providing that the Leader of Government Business shall be the Minister designated by the Government, I find that, in terms of how the House functions, the Standing Orders mean no more than that the Leader of Government Business is to be the Minister designated by the Government. It is that organ that is entrusted with the running of the Executive arm of the Republic.

The office of Leader of Government Business in this House has been held by various persons since Independence. At some times the office has been held by the Vice-President while at other times it has been held by a Minister. The one constant thread running through is that the decision about who shall be the Leader of Government Business has always been in the Executive.

Honourable Members, a number of Members suggested that as the Speaker had "recognised" the Vice-President acting as Leader of Government Business at some point, the Speaker was, therefore, estopped from entertaining any queries on the legality or propriety of the Vice-President’s incumbency as such. This is not so. The role of the Speaker, as is well known, is to act as a neutral arbiter. The Speaker is not a protagonist in the arena that is the House. The Speaker does not raise points of order on his own motion...

Continues Thursday.

Hon. Kenneth Marende, E.G.H., M.P.,

Speaker of the National Assembly

28th April, 2009.

 ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/04/when-ruler-surrenders-instruments-of.html Paza Sauti: When a ruler surrenders instruments of State to hangers on, tragedy is never far 2009-04-25T14:08:00-04:00 2009-04-25T14:08:00-04:00
They would invoke the Constitution to enquire into the wellness and ability of the national CEO. They would seek to know that it is safe to continue trusting him with the heavy, sensitive and critical responsibility of Office of President and Commander-in- Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Kenya.

But Kibaki is not Daniel arap Moi. People like Kamau Kuria and others know why they were very vocal against Moi. They know why they say nothing on Mzee Kibaki’s atrophied presidency. Instead they praise him, even as the country hurtles most dangerously on Destruction Highway.

But history shows that this is how it has always been with societies that will self-destruct. They have a sleepy, slow and laid back incumbent who quietly surrenders the instruments of State to his courtiers and hangers on. As the nation dithers on Destruction Highway, he is conspicuously missing in action. Only occasionally does he peep outside his hideout to mutter some irrelevant things while the nation slowly smoulders in what will presently become a full-blown inferno.

When France was gravitating towards the apocalypse of revolution in the late 1780s, Louis XVI was an absent-minded, slow and laid back Head of State and Government. He squandered valued time in making door locks and experimenting with guns and chasing after wild animals in the jungle. When he was not doing this, he would be sampling fine wines in the Palace at Versailles, while the spoilt Queen Marie Antoinette massaged his feet. Or he would simply be wallowing in perfumed bathtubs, completely oblivious of the storm building outside. Even when the custodians of public opinion raised the red flag, the drowsy King Louis XVI took no notice. In the proper order of time, France paid the price. But Louis XVI also paid his price, with his head, as did the spoilt Queen.

Elsewhere in Russia, King Nicholas II had for all practical purposes and intents surrendered the country into the hands of his spoilt Queen, Tsarina Alexandria and Grigori Yefimovich Rasputin. Rasputin, also known as the Mad Monk, doubled up as the queen’s not-so-secret lover and magic maker. Nicholas would in the proper order of time be forced to abdicate from the throne in May 1917. His reign saw Russia degenerate from one of the greatest powers of the times to an economic and military disaster. Historians have told of how the Bolsheviks ended the Romanov Dynasty with the weakly Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov as the last emperor. The country paid a heavy price.

Weak leaders are bad for any country. And President Kibaki is clearly not a strong willed leader. The religious fraternity has recently ventilated its exasperation with what it calls ‘a moribund president’. What they are saying is simply that the President is not in charge of the affairs of State. At any rate, he does not behave like one who is in charge. President Kibaki leaves you wondering what the presidency is about.

Ugandans are flying their flag on Kenyan soil and the President thinks this is just a practical joke. They tamper with beacons in West Pokot and the President’s voice is missing. Goons slaughter dozens of Kenyans in Gathiathi village and the President is missing in action. Kenyatta University goes up in flames under the charge of hopelessly flawed leadership and the President is nowhere.

The country is in the throes of a frightening constitutional crisis and the President sees nothing wrong with this. We have no electoral commission and no voters’ registers. If this presidency were to fall vacant in the present circumstances the country would burn. But the President is doing nothing to correct this absurdity, which in the first place he should never have allowed.

Make no mistake. The country is in a free fall. The electoral commission collapsed. The Judiciary is tottering on the brink of collapse. The Cabinet has collapsed. At its very best; it is a Tower of Babel. The presidency is ailing and crumbling. The only institution that can save Kenya is Parliament. But Parliament is ailing and facing imminent paralysis. For all its avarice and allied weaknesses, the Tenth Parliament must not be allowed to collapse. A presidency in atrophy requires other organs of State must take leadership. It is on the shoulders of the Speaker Kenneth Marende that the load of saving Kenya rests.

He must begin by saving Parliament. He must not let Parliament collapse. He must ensure there is a Leader of Government Business in the House next week and that this leader is not some whimsical self-seeking opportunist or turncoat who cannot be trusted with the reforms that Parliament must undertake, beginning now. Parliament for its part needs to move swiftly with the reform programme and to lead the way in Agenda Four of the National Peace and Reconciliation Accord.

Barrack Muluka ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/03/is-africa-staring-at-overt.html Paza Sauti: Is Africa Staring at Overt International Supervision 2009-03-23T21:34:00-04:00 2009-03-23T21:34:00-04:00 Collier is a contrarian. He goes against the flow of conventional thinking, which, in the case of the countries he baptized the bottom billion assumes that somehow those countries will turn around and become success stories. Not so says Collier, who by the way has updated the list of the countries he implies are basket cases to include virtually all sub-Saharan African countries. The way he sees it, the trajectory is in the wrong direction. More precisely, these poor and dangerous places are cornered. Left to their devices, these countries will stew in their misery forever, which may be fine by the rest of the international community except that the conditions of these countries imposes global public bad on the rest of the international community, which must act in self-interest, if nothing else, to minimize the costs to them.
Collier is not a heterodox thinker of big ideas distilled from opaque philosophies. He bases his analysis squarely on results of state of the art quantitative analysis. The thrust of Collier’s argument is that poor countries are hobbled by many challenges, most of them self-inflicted, that it would be unrealistic to expect them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps although an attempt to do so would help.
Take the matter of nation building. According to Collier, few of these places are nations: maybe they are states, and even so barely, but they are not nations in the modern sense of the term. Collier says a nation must have some internal identity and cohesion. Most of them lack both. Why is that a problem? By Collier’s lights, many of the countries are too big to be nations in the sense that they are an amalgam of various competing, often ethnic identities, and too small to be states because their size does not allow much of economies in the provision of public goods. That is his punch line. Bad consequences proceed from this fact. The politics in these places is ethno-centred because national cohesion is nonexistent. Bad governance further exacerbates the problem because its modus operandi is ethnic manipulation that sets the stage for perpetual ethnic rivalries over the control of public goods without consideration to the whole society.
In these circumstances, observes Collier, increased democracy simply ups the scale of rivalry that very often results in violence and the weakening of already weak societies Does Collier therefore believe that democracy is bad for fragile societies? In the short-term yes, but the alternative, dictatorship, is not really an option because it merely suppresses pressures without attempting to address their root causes. The reason increased freedom becomes disruptive is because rulers and the casts of supporting elites have not internalized democratic and accountability values. This leads to fundamental contradiction between form and content.
Collier dwells a great extent on Kenya as an exemplar of what could go wrong. The book is dedicated to John Githongo, the whistleblower on grand corruption in Kenya and the subject of a recently published book on governance in Kenya, It’s Our Turn to Eat, by Michela Wrong It did not surprise Collier in the least that the last election in Kenya held in 2007 was followed by mayhem of frightening proportions. The tragedy according to Collier is that the correct lessons are being missed and episodes like those that are likely to be repeated if both the countries concerned and the international community do not put the effort to learn from such experiences.
As far as internal solutions go, Collier pins his hopes on enlightened and visionary leadership such as Julius Nyerere's and Nelson Mandela's. Collier’s acknowledged friends, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni and Rwanda’s Paul Kagame do not make the cut although of the latter, Collier says, is the most effective state builder in Africa. Notice the use of the word state rather than nation. Kagame is building an effective but largely authoritarian state that militates against nation building because of its ethno-based ideologies.
Since the emergence of visionary leaders is chancy, Collier focuses on the international community as a potential source of corrective. International aid is the lifeline of the bottom billion countries. The trouble is, says Collier, aid has not been strategically and effectively deployed leading to disillusionment on both sides, particularly among the donors, who keep doling out money anyway for a variety of reasons, guilt among them.
This nonsense should stop declares Collier who would go a step further and add even stricter conditionality to ensure that aid reaches those it is intended for.
Sovereignty should not be an issue Collier claims boldly. Countries of the bottom billion do not have much national sovereignty to begin with; few of them are nations anyway. They might have state sovereignty but even that has been converted to presidential sovereignty. By framing the issue thusly, Collier carefully isolates what he sees as the main obstacle, leadership or lack of it, and then proceeds to propose remedies that target that major link in the chain. His conclusion: the international community should design carrots and sticks to influence leaders in the Bottom Billion countries to move towards better governance systems. The sticks, threats of military intervention in certain instances, should be credible. After all, observes Collier, the international community owes it to fellow human beings who bear the brunt of suffering in the Bottom Billion countries. A return to colonialism or trusteeship of a sort? Collier is unapologetic. If that is what it takes to heave the benighted places in the 21st century, so be it. Already, he says, it is underway in several places. Liberia has virtually ceded its sovereignty of its financial management to international donors. All checks cut by the country’s ministry of finance have to be countersigned by donors.
Collier may have found unlikely allies in certain parts of Africa. During a recent demonstration to protest the suspicious killing of two civil society activities, university students in Kenya carried placards calling for a return of foreign rule in Kenya. That was not much different from a comment by a bewildered character in Chinua Achebe’s the Anthills of the Savannah who wondered perplexedly when independence would end. Beware Africa. Berlin Conference II may not be too far off.

By John Mulaa PhD ]]> http://www.pazasauti.com/2009/03/help-us-make-powerful-noise.html Paza Sauti: Help Us Make A Powerful Noise 2009-03-02T16:56:00-05:00 2009-03-02T16:56:00-05:00
  • Hanh learned that she had contracted HIV after her husband and daughter died from AIDS. Bouncing back from despair, she started a self-help group in Vietnam, called Immortal Flower, to give people living with HIV/AIDS a place for support, counseling and health care.

  • Nada is a working mother of three children. As a refugee, she survived the Bosnian War. Her women’s association, Maja Kravica, is helping ease hostilities between Serbs and Bosniaks in a region marred by war crimes and massive destruction. Nada is building an agricultural cooperative to offer employment opportunities for war widows, and fair trade markets for families to sell their crops and livestock.

  • Jacqueline, better known as “Madame Urbain” fights forced labor practices in the slums of Bamako, Mali. Madame Urbain stands up for the rights of powerless girls who are often abused in the workplace or on the streets of the big city. Her organization, APAF, provides girls a basic education, teaches them vocational skills and places them in safe jobs

A Powerful Noise takes you inside the lives of these women to witness their daily challenges and their significant victories over poverty and oppression. Their stories are personal yet illustrate larger issues affecting millions of marginalized women worldwide. A Powerful Noise is a meditation on the inherent potential of women to change the world.

]]>