Buyers of minerals from rebel areas of eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) should be punished under a United Nations arms embargo, a group of experts has told the Security Council. A five-year war in the vast Central African nation that ended in 2003 has left much of DRC's eastern borderlands a volatile patchwork of rebel fiefdoms and militia-controlled zones.

The head of Zimbabwe's prison service has ordered his officers to vote for President Robert Mugabe and said he would resign if the opposition won next month's election, official media reported on Friday. The southern African country holds joint presidential, parliamentary and council elections on March 29 in which Mugabe faces former ally Simba Makoni and long-time rival Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the main opposition Movement for Democratic Change.

The Zimbabwe Youth Network (ZYN) and the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) have announced that there will be a huge demonstration at the Zimbabwe Consulate in Jo'burg on Wednesday, one day before another protest is due at the same location on Thursday. The Wednesday protest is being supported by numerous Zimbabwean groups, including the Crisis Coalition, Zimbabwe Political Victims Organisation (Zipovo), Civil Service Organisations Forum and both formations of the MDC.

The provincial elections officer for Manicaland has declined to institute an investigation into reports that a Zanu-PF legislator has allegedly helped ‘illegal aliens’ to register as voters. The MDC on Tuesday approached the head of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) in Mutare, Colonel Moffat Masabeya, and informed him of reports that Zanu-PF MP for Chipinge south Enock Porusingazi, was involved in voter registration fraud.

Kenyan leaders have agreed to work in a coalition government starting Thursday evening, chief mediator Kofi Annan has announced. The leaders are expected to sign documents of the historic agreement. This is the long awaited goods news after a period of uncertainty. Kenya sighed with relief as the two key protagonists President Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga finally settled to a coalition government with a pledge to build a stronger country.

Five of Cameroon's ten provinces are currently under severe and massive strike actions called Monday, February 25 by the Syndicate of transporters in Cameroon. These provinces include; Centre (hosting the capital city Yaounde), Southwest, Northwest, Littoral, host of Cameroon's economic capital, Douala and West.

The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) has started distributing emergency food assistance to tens of thousands of people in Madagascar, where at least 73 people have died and almost 150,000 others have been left homeless after Cyclone Ivan battered the island nation last week.

www.pambazuka.org

The full text of the agreement signed by Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga is available at the link below.

The Africa Regional Sexuality Resource Centre (ARSRC) calls for applications to its Annual Sexuality Leadership Development Fellowship (SLDF) Programme. The Fellowship is scheduled to take place in Lagos, Nigeria from July 7th – 26th, 2008. The fellowship is structured to promote sharing of ideas, team building and collaborative work amongst participants in order to nurture relationships that last beyond the fellowship period.

Workers at the Ghazl el-Mahalla textile mill in Egypt staged a mass demonstration last Sunday, calling for the end of the US-backed regime of Hosni Mubarak. The textile mill is the biggest in the Middle East. Its 27,000-strong workforce has been instrumental in forcing the regime into making economic concessions.

Pius Adesamni looks at the recent Raila Odinga visit with Obasanjo and argues that African ruling classes are so prodigious in the production of political farce that all one needs to do is read African newspapers for absurd realities that no African writer has as yet to match.

Give it to politicians, the military, and other professional hijackers of the state in Africa! They are able to squeeze the juice of comedy out of the stone of unspeakable tragedies they routinely visit on their people and the continent. The most unfortunate victim of the inexhaustible creativity of the African political class, their cynical mastery of the resources of the proscenium, is African fiction. The political class in Africa constitutes the most potent threat to the health of African literature. Simply put, our politicians are driving our writers out of business.

Why do I need to spend my hard-earned money on Wizard of the Crow and Petals of Blood when Raila Odinga and Mwai Kibaki have manufactured realities in Kenya that Ngugi wa Thiongo’o’s brilliant imagination simply cannot match? All I need is regular internet access to Kenyan newspapers to avail myself of a direct taste of Kenya according to her politicians.

Why do I need Chinua Achebe’s A Man of the People and T.M. Aluko’s One Man, One Matchet in my seminar room when the blood and flesh versions of Chief Nanga and Benjamin Benjamin in Abuja have turned Achebe and Aluko into dwarves in the business of fiction? The Nigerian ruling class is so prodigious in the production of political farce that all I need do is read Nigerian newspapers for quotidian realities that no Nigerian writer has the imagination to match.

That African politicians are constantly and permanently ahead of hapless African writers was brought home by two recent events. Ogaga Ifowodo, one of Nigeria’s best poets, wrote an essay in which he imagined a meeting between Mwai Kibaki and Umaru Yar’Adua. What did Yar’Adua tell Kibaki, Ifowodo asked? To create his hypothetical situation, Ifowodo deployed the full arsenal of his trade: sarcasm, hyperbole, allusions, and the like. At the end of the essay, Ifowodo was sure he had delivered his message effectively and unambiguously: the Nigerian presidency is so diseased, so morally compromised, that the possibility of the Nigerian government having a say in the Kenyan debacle can only exist in the realms of fiction and the most outrageous imagination. Given the rotten political pedigree of the people in charge in Abuja, Nigeria’s involvement was so improbable that Ifowodo treated it as fiction, something better left as material for the exclusive use of the African writer.

As is sadly often the case in Africa, Odinga, the politician, was miles ahead of Ifowodo, the writer. Odinga did not wait for Ifowodo’s ink to dry before hopping on a flight to Nigeria last week. His mission? Wait for it: to consult with Chief Olusegun Obasanjo (Nigeria’s immediate past president) and persuade him to convince Alhaji Umaru Yar’Adua, current president and Obasanjo’s puppet, that it was time Nigeria got involved in fashioning an African solution to Kenya’s political impasse! It has taken Ogaga Ifowodo more than twenty years of sustained production of brilliant poetry to establish his reputation as one of Africa’s leading users of the imagination. Raila Odinga and his Nigerian hosts have eclipsed this record in a couple of hours.

When I read about Odinga’s trip to Nigeria, I had a tough choice between laughing and crying. I settled for the former. To grasp the tragedy in all its unpleasant ramifications, one has to unpack Odinga’s company in Nigeria: Obasanjo and his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) machinery. Of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, the least said the better. Writing about Obasanjo here would turn this piece into an exposé on unbridled corruption and the defoliation of Nigeria’s destiny in two tragic installments: 1976 – 1979, and 1999 – 2007. Whenever tails are mentioned in a discussion, the toad hurriedly suggests changing the topic and moving on to other issues! So, let’s leave Obasanjo and move on to Yar’Adua and the PDP.

History’s final verdict on African political parties would be hard pressed not to record the PDP as the most vicious, most corrupt, and most visionless political organization ever to bestride the Nigerian – and African political landscape. It would be sheer travesty of justice if the National Party of Henrik Verwoerd and Pieter Botha fared worse than Nigeria’s PDP in the reckoning of history. Ever since its unfortunate formation, the PDP has been home to the worst elements of Nigerian humanity. Although it loves to delude itself as Africa’s largest political party, the truth is that the PDP is Africa’s largest assembly of funny characters with zero moral capital. Excellence in political thuggery, treasury looting, and election rigging are key attributes of membership and upward mobility in party ranks. It is significant that in a supposedly democratic dispensation, the PDP has surpassed Sani Abacha’s record of unresolved political assassinations. The rate of intra-party assassinations became so breathtaking at a point that the inimitable Wole Soyinka baptized the PDP as a “nest of killers”. Soyinka forgot to add that the PDP is also a lair of Africa’s most gifted thieves. To go through the list of party leaders – Party Chieftains in Nigerian parlance – is to be in stark contemplation of the tragedy of modern Nigeria: Olusegun Obasanjo (self-appointed Father of modern Nigeria), Olabode George, Ahmadu Ali, Lamidi Adedibu (stark illiterate, recently designated Father of the PDP!), Andy Uba, Chris Uba, and thousands of other birds of similar feather, looting the state dry in rigged political positions.

That these low-quality characters and their scions have hijacked the Nigerian state is a precise indication of the abysmally low depths to which Nigeria has fallen. Among the many sins of this dishonorable cabal and their dishonorable party, the 2007 election pretty much takes the cake. Nigerians are in agreement with the international community that the PDP’s 2007 electoral heist ranks among the worst in human history. It is unnecessary to rehash the details here. Suffice it to assert that Umaru Yar’Adua, Nigeria’s current president, is the morally compromised custodian of a purloined mandate who has been unable to rise above the debased values of his cabal and do the right thing. Rather, he has ignored the festering leprosy his diseased party has foisted on Nigeria while hypocritically making a show of his determination to cure negligible ringworm infections.

This is a snapshot of the kind of company Raila Odinga went to keep in Nigeria. The story of Nigeria’s sorry pass in the gangrened grip of the PDP cartel is globally ubiquitous: not even a blind and deaf kindergarten pupil in Siberia can claim ignorance of the Nigerian situation. What part of this narrative did Raila Odinga not understand? The ways of the African politician are truly perplexing! How did Raila Odinga arrive at the conclusion that Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Yar’Adua and his PDP government, morally compromised perpetrators of the worst electoral heist in human history, are in any position to advise him on the way forward in Kenya? How did he determine that Nigeria’s forty thieves deserve a place at the table of serious African conversations on credible elections, good governance, and democracy? Who are Odinga’s handlers in Kenya? How could all of them have missed the fact that the people he was going to consult in Nigeria practice a version of democracy that consists in assassinating your opponent or rigging your way to political office? Do we need to translate “nest of killers” to Swahili before Mwalimu Odinga can understand that simple expression? By going to consult the worst Nigeria has to offer, Odinga has spat on the graves of the Kenyans who have lost their lives so far and added to our frustration and helplessness as ordinary Nigerians.

Nigerians are in a particularly sensitive phase of their national life. We are a beautiful country of beautiful people who have had the extraordinary misfortune of being held hostage by the worst among us. Although we once contributed exemplary characters to Africa’s leadership pool during the nationalist and immediate post-nationalist eras, we have never known democracy in any real sense. The closest we came to it was on June 12, 1993 when ‘we, the people’ voted in the only free and fair election we have ever known. Our hopes and aspirations were quashed by the same vicious enemy-cabal that aborted our dreams of post-independence nationhood and have held us hostage ever since. Sometimes, this cabal comes in army fatigues; sometimes it wears flowing civilian robes but it is the same rotten organism that perpetually recycles itself. When people who should know better invite the worst we have to offer to the table, the wound cuts deep in the Nigerian psyche. It reminds us painfully of Frostian roads not taken. And in this case, we are much more certain than Frost of what could have been had the right people taken the roads not taken.

It bears repeating: the Nigerian state, currently held hostage by a dishonorable cabal and a bloodthirsty, kleptocratic political party, does not qualify to be consulted or invited to the table when good governance and credible elections in Africa are in the agenda. If Raila Odinga was so desperate for Nigerian advice, all he needed do was ask and we would have supplied him names of Nigerians who qualify to be at the table. Nigeria has more that a hundred million names that could have given Odinga advice from an eminently moral high ground since members of the dishonorable enemy-cabal are, thankfully, in the minority and in no way represent what we have to offer as a people. If Odinga had consulted serious people before embarking on his worthless trip to Nigeria, one would have given him such meritorious names as Wole Soyinka, Chinua Achebe, Ngozi Okonjo Iweala, Gani Fawehinmi, Patrick Utomi, Edwin Madunagu, Odia Ofeimun, Okey Ndibe, Omoyele Sowore, just to mention a few. These are among our very best, the kinds of people who still make it possible for Nigerians to defy the rape of their humanity by the jokers in the PDP and identify proudly with their nation.

If, however, Mwalimu Odinga insists on getting his advice on how to move Kenya forward from discredited African sources, we can also help him. Let him return to Nigeria and consult with all the corrupt PDP governors currently facing embezzlement charges. On his way back home, he may want to stop over in Libreville and Yaounde for consultations on credible democracy with Omar Bongo and Paul Biya. A stopover with Eugene Terreblanche in South Africa will spice up things nicely. He may then return to Nairobi and tell Kofi Annan that he has received superior advice from more credible sons of Africa!

* Pius Adesanmi is Associate Professor of English and Director, Project on New African Literatures at Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada. Apart from his academic work, Dr. Adesanmi publishes opinion articles regularly in various internet fora. He runs a regular blog for The Zeleza Post where this article first appeared. He has contributed to Counterpunch, Slepton and Chimurenga online.

** Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org This article first appeared at The Zeleza Post.

This week’s AU Monitor brings you analysis of the AU audit report from Dolphine Ndeda who urges that the report be popularised and implemented immediately. She notes that “one general finding of the Panel was that the AU commission is characterised by internal institutional incoherence and disarray” and calls on the incoming Chairperson and Commissioners to prioritize management and outreach reform without delay.

In economic development news, Abdoulie Janneh, Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Africa, explains that Africa’s improved economic growth has been “underpinned by better governance, improved macroeconomic management and increased global demand for Africa’s commodities” but notes that the improvement is insufficient to achieve the AU vision of development or commitments under the Millennium Development Goals. As a means to improve food security and household income on the Continent, Nepad’s Dr. Maria Wanzala, advocates for increased use of fertilisers suggesting that this could lead to agricultural growth of six per cent by 2015. Further, ahead of the Accra high-level forum on Aid Effectiveness in September, Governance Director of the African Development Bank, Gabriel Negatu, explains the Strategic Partnership for Africa (SPA). “The SPA is important as it serves as a forum for donors and recipient countries to reflect on the changing nature of the international aid environment, based on the principles of ‘ownership’ and ‘partnership’. It has therefore been instrumental in fostering the implementation of the Paris Declaration on aid harmonization.” Also addressing regional development imperatives, the Southern African Development Community will hold its International Consultative Conference on Poverty and Development under the theme “Regional Economic Integration: A Strategy for Poverty Eradication towards Sustainable Development” between 18 - 20 April 2008 in Mauritius.

The Peace and Security Council of the African Union issued reports from the Chairperson on the situations in Chad and Somalia. Providing an update on the situation in Somalia and the implementation of the African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) mandate, the report outlines the need for contingency planning for a possible United Nations operation. The report notes with concern the continued lack of troops with only two Ugandan battalions and the very recent deployment of the main body of the first of the two battalions pledged by Burundi. The report on Somalia concludes “more than ever before, swift and collective action is needed (…). Failure to effectively address the crisis in Somalia will leave a legacy of unfulfilled promises towards the Somali people, damage the credibility of the international community, as well as further undermine the prospects of peace in the country and compound efforts to promote regional stability.”

The Chairperson’s report on Chad provides an update on the situation and welcomes the initiative of the Congo and Libya to send a delegation of senior officials to Chad for consultations with the parties to the conflict. In addition, Henri Boshoff of the Institute for Security Studies emphasizes that “it is clear that if the international community, through the United Nations and the European Union, do not response more urgently, the situation in Chad, Darfur and CAR could well worsen.”

Lastly, newly elected AU Commission Chairperson Jean Ping visited Kenya on Friday. Following talks with the parties and mediation team, he expressed optimism that a power-sharing deal “is just within reach”. However, since his visit, the AU led mediation talks have been suspended.

Pambazuka News is pleased to bring you this interview with the directors of the documentary 'Dear Mandela', Christopher Nizza and Dara Kell. 'Dear Mandela' deals with the growing contradictions in post-Apartheid South Africa where the majority black poor continue to be victimized by the state through measures such as forced evictions. Abahlali baseMjondolo, a new social movement of shackdwellers is challenging the conditions as well as the state of democracy itself in the country - what one the respondents in the documentary calls "new apartheid". You can see a clip of this important and timely documentary at "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZWIZX_8ub8.

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: The first question is on the title - Why 'Dear Mandela' and not Mbeki?

CHRISTOPHER NIZZA AND DARA KELL: ‘Dear Mandela’ examines how the lives of the poorest South Africans – those who had the most hope when Apartheid officially ended in 1994 – have changed in the 17 years since Mandela was released from prison. . Again and again, we heard appreciation for what Mandela did – that he sacrificed twenty-seven years of his freedom for the freedom of South Africans. The name ‘Dear Mandela’ emerged after spending time with shack dwellers who told us they saw Nelson Mandela as a ‘second Jesus Christ’. For many South Africans, when Mandela was released from prison, a ‘better life for all’, which became the rallying cry for the newly elected ANC government – finally seemed possible. The people we interviewed often wondered how Mandela would feel if he was allowed to visit the informal settlements, if he saw that conditions have not only failed to improve since the end of Apartheid, they have worsened. Mandela seemed to many of the people we spoke to, to be the one person who could change things, and so this short film almost takes the form of a plea – not just to Mandela, but to the world – to see what has been deliberately kept from view by a current South African government intent on creating ‘world class cities’ in preparation for the 2010 Soccer World Cup.

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: Can you talk to PZN about the evictions? How are they reminiscent of the apartheid government? Or is that too much of a stretch?

CHRISTOPHER NIZZA AND DARA KELL: While we were filming in Durban with Abahlali baseMjondolo, we spoke to many shack dwellers who were facing eviction. Zamise Hohlo, a sixteen-year-old girl who was born and still lives in the Shannon Drive informal settlement, told us that municipal workers came and demolished her shack while she was at work. Sitting amidst the wreckage, she told us that she was at a crossroads: she could rebuild her shack, but the municipal workers had informed her that if she rebuilt, they would just come and tear it down again.

We have found that there are stereotypes about shack dwellers that go against all of our experience in the time we spent with them. These stereotypes make it easier for the public to turn a blind eye to what is happening them, and make it easier for municipal workers to do their job of ‘clearing the slums’. One of the reasons we want to make this film is because by letting the shack dwellers speak for themselves, their dignity is respected, and our hope is that viewers will be able to see the shack dwellers not as illegal squatters who should be pushed out of the city, but as citizens of South Africa who have the same rights to housing under the Constitution.

Yes, in some ways the evictions are reminiscent of evictions during the Apartheid era. The notorious new ‘Slums Act’ certainly evokes the Native Land Act of 1913, The Group Areas Act of 1950, The Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act of 1951- acts which remove people from their communities and place them far away from the city, away from work, school, clinics. Some shack dwellers told us that what they are experiencing is a ‘New Apartheid’ between the rich and poor. Indeed, several people we interviewed said that life was better under Apartheid. The statistics suggest that life for the poorest of the poor was better under Apartheid - a UN study showed that the number of people living on less that $1 a day has doubled since 1994. These charges are sure to stir controversy and that is one of the motivations we have to continue on this project, to illuminate the rarely told story of post-apartheid South Africa’s most marginalized.

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: Can you talk about the role of film in bringing about change?

CHRISTOPHER NIZZA AND DARA KELL: In much of the world, the way we communicate is visual. The visual medium is a language that everyone understands from advertisements on the street to television to a growing use of the Internet. While we are working towards a longer film, we posted the 6-minute version of ‘Dear Mandela’ on YouTube and were able to share the insights and struggles of South African shack dwellers instantaneously. Within days, hundreds of people had watched the film. In an age where the gap between rich and poor is increasing globally, there is a need for stories which show not just the plight of the poor, but the fight that they are engaged in. This is one of the main ideas behind Sleeping Giant, our media collective/production company. The corporate media and even some prominent left academics tend to stereotype the world’s poor as being this unruly mass of dangerous, lazy, uneducated people unable to contribute to discussions about issues affecting them most. Through film and video projects produced involving groups like Abahlali we hope to smash those stereotypes by providing a space for people to tell the story of their plight and fight thus projecting a more realistic portrayal.

Those who are struggling to survive while organizing for a better life need our encouragement and support. The film is a celebration of the work of Abahlali as well – of the almost sacred meeting space they have created, where old and young are welcomed and respected; of their refusal to accept the broken promises of the government; of their continuing to march in peaceful protest in the face of intimidating police brutality. And so while many of the stories in ‘Dear Mandela’ are disheartening, what we want to portray is a community that is figuring out the real meaning of democracy – democracy that is a far cry from ‘one man, one vote’ – it’s what Abahlali calls a ‘living politics.’

We’ve done research, and some preliminary filming, and the six-minute film ‘Dear Mandela’ is the culmination of that effort, but we intend to return for a much longer time, where we aim to interview government officials and other relevant players, to show many more sides of a very complex situation

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: What other films have you made/are making?

CHRISTOPHER NIZZA AND DARA KELL This is our first venture into the world of feature documentary filmmaking. We have both worked as editors on other documentaries, like the Academy Award-nominated Jesus Camp, State of Fear, and others. We have also led filmmaking workshops for community leaders, to both encourage the use of media in their political work and transfer the skills required to produce media.

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: What can other Africans and international friends do to help out?

CHRISTOPHER NIZZA AND DARA KELL: From what we could see a major problem for Abahlali is lack of resources. We witnessed how they maximize literally every rusted nail and every tattered piece of wood. This goes on to money that is raised as all funds are decided by collective how to be spent. We saw this as some money came in following the tragic Christmas night shack fires at the Foreman Road. Very careful and respectful consideration goes into how all monies are spent. It is much different then donating money to an NGO where the people living in struggle are more often not the ones making decisions. People interesting in supporting can get some ideas here (http://www.abahlali.org/node/269) on the Abahlali website. The website is also extremely rich with days worth of wonderful reading for anyone interested in this extremely important and courageous work.

*Dara Kell is a South African documentary filmmaker.  She divides her time between South Africa and New York, where she edits documentaries and leads grassroots video-making workshops. 

**Christopher Nizza is a New York born, bred and based director and editor.  He also has worked on a project in the U.S. called the University of the Poor which works to provide education and exchange in a variety of disciplines to organizations working in the struggle to end poverty forever.

***Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

To the NCBL, to Mark P. Fancher (principal drafter of Africom threatens the sovereignty, Jeffrey L. Edison and Ajamu Sankofa, the editor, and to all those who comprehend what "interconnected" is all about:

First, thank you for this enlightening information in the form of your article. This is powerful stuff, and I am sorry to say, all too familiar to me. My knowledge of American history and of African history is rudimentary, but I certainly know enough to hear a familiar pattern revealed by your report.

We have long ago run out of pages on which to chronicle the litany of horrors committed against African peoples on and beyond the African continent. (This could be said for many parts of the world, but none more dramatically than the African continent and it’s peoples.) I mean, if we really are all connected, and if our fates ultimately lie in our own hands and in our ability to act on this connection, then it should be clear that the so-called spiritual high road is actually the fastest, cheapest and most effective way to create a truly sustainable world economy. And, if we believe the overwhelming majority consensus of science, aren't we all literally descendants of Africa?

This is tough for some people to embrace, but I never understand why. Our mis-guided, myopic, and divisive notions of nationality might be better focused on how we are all members of a greater, integrated, interdependent family, simply living in different parts of the world. And please, could we do this sometime BEFORE we create the NEXT world-wide crisis of our own making?

“Ain’t it time we look to ourselves to assess
if we are wisely using the powers we possess?
Ain’t it time we took our visions seriously
and embrace the common ground of our humanity?
Ain’t it time for our actions to add up and be
a wave of our wondrous diversity?
Ain’t it time to sleep with and make love to our dreams
Until our dreams become our reality?

Ain’t it time?”

So yes, I get your point.

That’s why I do what I do. Along with Senegalese nationaI, Mr. Massamba Diop, (tama drummer with Baaba Maal) I am the co-founder of the Senegal-America Project.

This project is about how the music can sound and how the world can look when we realize that we are actually all connected.

Maybe we have something in common here? I’m sure of this: The friends we make, up close and personal, doing our projects one-on-one are the medicine against the poison of ignorance and self-defeating greed. We do our work; music, education, health and social issues, art, all for our mutual, immediate and long- term benefit.

This may be pushy, but hey, we could use some help.

Oh we’re doing amazing things, it’s just that we are going slower than we are capable of going. It’s all grass roots, people-oriented work. Things like concerts and workshops in schools in America and in Africa, to get young students in the mid-set of realizing their issues are shared by others their age on the other side of the world…and that they can begin to create and work on projects that address these issues together. Things like money and resources to build and supply school buildings, mosquito nets to prevent malaria, arts exchange projects to show how something they do in their world can change the environment of a friend they’ve never met, who lives thousands of miles away.

This is the medicine against Africom, and we have it in vast supplies. Everyone wants to be part of this. We could use a little help to put it all together in an even more effective way.

Check out the Senegal-America Project at the site of our non-profit arts organization: http://www.arts-are-essential.org/senegal.about.php

You can also go to my web site and read my take on the Senegal-America Project. It's:http://www.tonyvacca.com/senegalamerica.

Blessing-Miles Tendi argues that because Britain lacks the moral authority to comment on or interfere in Zimbabwean affairs, it would serve the Zimbabwean search for freedom and justice by keeping away.

Since 2000, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe government has cast the Zimbabwe crisis as a struggle by Britain, an ex-colonial power, to re-colonise its former colony by supporting and funding the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party. Britain has blindly walked into Mugabe’s anti-colonial trap consistently, which has exposed Zimbabwe’s internal opposition to harmful labels such as ‘sell-outs to the imperialists’.

Britain has expressed its frustration with Southern African leaders’ unwillingness to censure Mugabe publicly and to force him into retirement. A number of factors explain Southern African leaders’ stance on Mugabe and chief among them is that for a long time the MDC was distrusted by regional leaders and perceived as sell-outs to new-imperialism. Britain bore responsibility for this false perception of the opposition in Zimbabwe because its anti-Mugabe stance made Zimbabwe’s opposition easy prey for Mugabe’s anti-colonial constructions. Britain is partly responsible for the failure of a democratic opposition to replace the undemocratic Mugabe in elections since 2000.

Mugabe has also proved adroit at articulating British double standards on global human rights promotion to bolster his refutation of Western criticism of his government’s human rights record. Britain dilutes its moral authority when it calls for its national cricket team to boycott tours of Zimbabwe because of the country’s poor human rights record but remains silent when its national team tours Pakistan, which is also a grave human rights violator. Britain’s condemnations and targeted sanctions against the Mugabe government would command more moral authority if the same human rights standards were applied everywhere evenly. Failure to apply human rights standards evenly results in staunch claims to sovereignty in the non-Western world. The danger lies in the fact that some of these claims are merely pretexts for internal repression – something Mugabe is guilty of.

After Britain’s involvement in the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq its moral authority is at its lowest ebb internationally. Thus, it is breathtakingly naïve for the Foreign Secretary David Milliband to insist, as he did in Oxford this month, that despite Britain’s failures in Iraq, Britain has ‘a moral duty’ to intervene in undemocratic countries – and by force if necessary – in order to spread democracy internationally. Very few countries still look up to Britain as a champion of human rights and democracy, and none in Southern Africa will countenance its involvement in their internal affairs. ‘We are tired of being lectured on democracy by the very countries which, under colonialism, either directly denied us the rights of free citizens, or were indifferent to our suffering and yearnings to break free and be democratic’ – remember these utterances by the Tanzanian government, one of Britain’s favoured donor recipients in Southern Africa, in 2004?

Britain has, as a starting premise, the logic that its modern day standing as a developed democracy automatically confers the moral authority to censure what it considers to be less democratic countries such as Zimbabwe. But its flawed history of intervention and interference in Zimbabwe has left it with little or no moral credibility there. Britain granted Rhodesia’s white settler community ‘responsible self-government’ in 1923. However, the country remained a British colony and Britain retained the right to veto legislation affecting the black African majority. Rhodesia’s white minority passed various laws that subjected the blacks to treatment as subhuman. Not once did Britain exercise its veto power to strike down Rhodesia’s dehumanising and racist laws.

In 1965, Rhodesia severed ties with the British crown by declaring the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI). Britain was called upon to use military force to rein in the rebellious UDI government’s perpetuation of white minority rule. Prime Minister Harold Wilson ruled out the use of force. He chose to impose sanctions and declared that the UDI government would survive the sanctions for no more than 6 weeks. Rhodesia weathered the sanctions until black majority rule was attained in 1980, after a peace settlement a year earlier, which brought to an end one of the most bloody and bitterly fought liberation wars in Africa.

In the 1980s, Britain venerated Mugabe while he massacred 20000 civilians in Zimbabwe’s Matabeleland province. The reason? According to Roger Martin, Deputy British High Commissioner to Zimbabwe (1983-86), ‘no British government wanted a couple of hundred thousand British citizens appearing with cardboard suitcases at Heathrow, the sudden expulsion of whites if we had pulled the rug on the aid [to Zimbabwe] and as it were denounced Mugabe [for the massacres].’

In spite of assurances Britain made to the Mugabe government at independence, to fund the redress of racially biased land distribution in Zimbabwe, in 1997 it declared that it did not accept ‘a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe’. 3 years later a violent programme of land seizures from white farmers without compensation began to unfold. Zimbabwe is what it is economically today partly because of these land seizures.

Foreign Secretary Milliband has called for international monitoring of Zimbabwe’s 2008 elections, saying conditions for the poll are ‘far from free and fair’. But Britain should be the last to speak out and it should desist from prejudging the forthcoming elections publicly because this is exactly what Mugabe wants Britain to do. Already, Mugabe has said his party’s 2008 election campaign will focus on resisting Britain’s regime change agenda in Zimbabwe. Mugabe has set his anti-colonial trap for Britain and if Milliband’s comments are anything to go by, Britain is walking into it once again. Britain would better serve the struggle for democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe by taking a back seat in the country’s elections next month because it has no moral authority in Southern Africa. Groupings such as the European Union and the Southern African Development Community should take the lead not Britain because it risks aiding Mugabe’s re-election bid.

*Blessing-Miles Tendi is a researcher at Oxford University.

**Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Former finance minister and member of the Zanu PF politburo, Simba Makoni is challenging Robert Mugabe later this month for the leadership of Zimbabwe. Sehlare Makgetlanen tackles the question of whether he represents a break from the past or more of the same.

Zimbabwe under the leadership of Mugabe is facing fundamental governance, democracy and development challenges. It has failed to ‘‘legitimately exercise power and authority over the control and management of the country’s affairs in the interest of the people and in accordance with the principles of justice, equity, accountability and transparency.” Mugabe has prevented some members of the Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) from expressing their governance, democracy and development policy preferences through democratic means to be the president of ZANU-PF and the country. He regards himself as the only leading judge of what best serves the national interests of Zimbabwe which include governance, democracy and development demands, needs and interests of the country and its people.

Mugabe has threatened to be the stumbling block for ZANU-PF to win free and fair elections and for the resolution of Zimbabwe’s governance, democracy and development problems. Processes and issues leading to true national self-determination should not be left into the hands of one leader irrespective of the unquestionable content of his or her commitment to the liberation cause and that the political leadership including the leadership in the political administration of the society is the collective process in which no individual is indispensable. He has in the process mobilised some members of ZANU-PF to implement their decision to use their strength and resources in challenging him not only as the president of the party but also as the president of the country. Those theirs is hostility to the new leadership of the party and the country as required by the present situation – the struggle fought for under the pretext of defending the unity of the party – must be democratically fought against. It is not in the interest of the country and its people in defending the unity of the party if its president is against the popular national interests – the governance, democracy and development demands, needs and interests of the country and its people.

Whether they will use this development to have collective leadership and the democratic means capable of adequately appropriating Zimbabwe’s problems for their confrontation and resolution remains to be seen. These problems have intensified. This development led Simba Makoni to challenge Mugabe in the 29 March 2008 presidential elections. What is the present state of Zimbabwe’s national situation? “The Zimbabwe of today,” according to Makoni at the launch of his election manifesto in Harare on 13 February 2008, “is a nation full of fear, a nation in deep stress, a tense and polarised nation, a nation also characterised by disease and extreme poverty.” It is a nation in which “immediate and urgent tasks to resolve the food, power and fuel, water and sanitation problems, resolve health and educational services” should be undertaken.

Highlighting the gravity of Zimbabwe’s socio-political and economic situation, Makoni in his 5 February 2008 announcement that he would challenge Mugabe in the 29 March 2008 presidential elections as candidate pointed out that he shares “the agony and anguish of all citizens over the extreme hardships we have all endured for nearly 10 years.” Admitting the role played by the national leaders on the development of the national situation, he told reporters that he also shares “the widely held view that these hardships are a result of failure of national leadership and that change at that level is a prerequisite for change at other levels of national endeavour.” He was denied opportunity to a “renewal of the leadership in the ZANU-PF and country” to end economic crisis and “national despair.” It is for this reason, among others, that what he is “offering is the chance for hope” to rid Zimbabwe of fear and poverty. The point is that “we believe that solving these problems will not be intractable, once we remove the barriers and impediments that bar the expression and pursuit of our common interest and common purpose.” If elected, he promises that he would “address national issues that separate and divide us as a nation and institute a process of national healing and reconciliation.” Having been expelled from ZANU-PF, he is standing as an independent presidential candidate in the presidential and parliamentary elections scheduled for 29 March 2008. He calls upon Zimbabweans particularly members of the party to join him in his struggle to prevent Mugabe from winning a sixth term in office. “I particularly invite those compatriots who have been pushed into despair and despondency, but have the qualities of leadership, to please enter the race. I also invite those in ZANU-PF who share our yearning for renewal to contest the election as independent candidates under our banner.” He is contesting elections under the banner of the movement called Dawn (Mavambo/Kusile), whose logo features a rising sun. “The time for decision has come. Jump off the fence, climb out of the false comfort zones.” Contrary to Makoni’s position, members of the ruling alliance are not in “the false comfort zones.” Theirs are structures of wealth and privileges.

There is essentially nothing new Makoni has pointed out since announcing his decision to challenge Mugabe in the elections. He has repeated statements opposition political parties and their critics have been saying about the country’s problems and how to resolve them. On the atrocious abuse of power and public resources and use of violent measures to deal with dissent and opposition including within the ruling party, he maintains: “Zimbabweans are experiencing stress and tension because of the siege mentality in the state, with the state resorting to violence to suppress dissent, a lack of respect for the law and gross abuse of state resources.” He continues: “National institutions have been corrupted, privatised and politicised. We are seeing a scourge of the politics of patronage and gross abuse of power and a culture of chiefdom.” He has served as a senior participant in creating and sustaining this democracy practice. He continues stating what has been attributed not only to the ruling party, but also to two factions of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). “There is lack of a national vision and agenda on the basis which all Zimbabweans could be mobilised for national reconciliation and revival.” What is his vision and agenda on the basis which Zimbabweans could be mobilised to serve as social agents for development and progress of their country is the strategic question which he has so far failed to answer. Predicting a landslide victory in the elections, he is basing his campaign platform on the revival of the economy and the restoration of political freedoms and property rights. He claims that this strategy will “restore our people’s independence, dignity and confidence.” This strategy will continue, if he wins elections, in managing the inequality of power relations between the rulers and the ruled of the country.

As it happened in the past, members of ZANU-PF were denied their democratic rights and opportunity to fight for nomination during its December 2007 congress so as to stand as the party’s candidate in the 29 March 2008 presidential elections. It endorsed Mugabe as its sole candidate. This decision ensured that he should not be challenged within the ruling party in his attempt to be re-elected as the president of the country. Makoni was defying this decision in announcing that he would challenge him as the ruling party’s candidate in the elections. He maintains that at the December 2007 congress, some party members including himself were prevented from seeking nomination as its presidential candidate. In his words: “I would have very much wished to stand as (ZANU-PF) official candidate. Unfortunately, as we all know, that opportunity was denied to other cadre who would have offered themselves to serve the party and country.”

While Makoni’s announcement is viewed by some individuals as a substantial and welcome addition in the arsenal against Mugabe, the MDC faction led by Morgan Tsvangirai and civil society organisations aligned to it regard him as the ruling party agent deployed to divide the opposition vote in the elections. Tsvangirai dismissed him as “nothing more than old wine in a new bottle.” Lovemore Madhuku was more harsh and brutal. He dismissed him as the part of the ZANU-PF-state institutional machinery and its project guilty of many years of its rule. As usual, the ruling party viewed him as the traitor and agent of imperialist interests. Questions are raised as to whether he is honest and sincere in his declared challenge to Mugabe. Is he the intelligence project by supporters of Mugabe designed to identify senior members of the ruling party who are Mugabe’s opponents he maintains support his campaign? Some are of the view that his aim is to split the opposition vote – most importantly urban voters who have supported the MDC in the previous elections.

Why did Makoni decide to challenge Mugabe? At what time did he seriously convince himself that he should summon his courage to challenge Mugabe? Why did he announce his decision so late? Is it because his wish to be the ruling party’s official candidate was rejected? Was he forced to make his decision? If he was forced, who forced him, for what strategic and tactical reasons? The announcement of his decision raises the key question as to whether he is a shrewd politician capable of effectively challenging Mugabe. What are his strategy and tactics to win elections and to effect the democratic transformation of the state and society? Is his campaign individual or collective effort? Can the majority of Zimbabweans regard it as their proud national product? Who within the ruling party are supporting his campaign? Have they participated in the creation and sustenance of the current situation? Are they now convinced that Mugabe is threatening their interests and therefore he should be replaced as the country’s president for their interests to continue being protected? Why they have not publicly articulated what they stand for – particularly how and for what strategic and tactical ends Zimbabwe should be governed? He initially stated that he was standing as an independent presidential candidate within the ruling party challenging Mugabe. He refused, given his loyalty to the party, to end his relationship with it. He was embracing leaderless illusion that the party will not end its relationship with him. As the party correctly pointed out, he expelled himself from it by making his announcement. He continues, after expulsion from the party, refusing to provide a critical analysis of the party and how it ruled the society and articulating this to Zimbabweans so as to with their support for him to solve problems they have been facing as he claims to be his key reason why he decided to contest elections. He continues refusing also to use opportunity to substantiate in practice that he is independent from the ruling party.

Makoni has so far failed to provide failed to provide alternative vision and agenda of the future Zimbabwe to that offered by ZANU-PF and two MDC factions. Despite acute problems confronted by the masses on the daily basis, his strategy and tactics have failed to meet their demands and needs. The consequence is that they do not recognise them as expressions of their own experience. Briefly, they failed to capture their imaginations. Is he for the authentic national popular democratisation of the society and the state for the masses of the Zimbabwean people to be the main authority in achieving, maintaining and expanding their interests? Unless the power to determine the form and content as well as the timetable of the change is in the hands of the masses of the people through the leadership of those who have surrendered their being their representatives to their cause, unilateral declaration of independence of leaders from the people will always be the negation of the popular principle, “we are our own liberators.”

The strategic tasks confronting the masses of Zimbabweans are political. Who should be their national president and why? How should be their national problems be resolved? What should be the nature of the future Zimbabwe’s relations with its regional and continental African countries and the rest of the world particularly developed countries? How best and effectively to improve the material conditions of the millions of Zimbabweans? These are some of the questions which should be answered to the satisfaction of the majority of Zimbabweans.

*Sehlare Makgetlaneng is the head of Southern African and SADC Desk at the Africa Institute of South Africa.

**Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_01_matubalemurphy.gif by Matuba Mahlatjie.
Matuba Mahlatjie is a gay blogger living in Pretoria. He comments on the possibility of Jacob Zuma becoming the next President of South Africa. He is particularly concerned over the recent acceptance by Zuma to attend a luncheon by Black Journalists Forum in South Africa.
“This forum of black journalists is so anti democracy and transparency. I listened to all their excuses for barring white journalists and they did not make any sense. The truth is they are making us look like uneducated savages who are comfortable with being repellers of change.

It is unfortunate that the people (Journalists) who are supposed to help the nation eradicate the evil spirit of racism - are the ones who are painting the country black and white. All media houses in South Africa have black journalists, but I like the fact that Talk Radio 702 and e.tv deliberately sent white journalist to expose the devil that possess the Black Journalist Forum here in South Africa.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_02_lesbianrules.gifhttp://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_03_bandwidthblog.gifhttp://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_04_jontyfisher.gifThe Fish Bowl comments on an article by Dr Steven Friedman on the political and economic realities of the ANC
“The article summarises what I have been trying to push for some time. We keep trying to look at the ANC through Western prisms, when the leader of the ANC party is not usually the decision-maker. Mbeki was the ultimate decision-maker in his cabinet, but it is this type of leadership that has sparked the current "revolution" in voter sentiment. There are many players in the NEC and the NWC who hold vast business interests, the it is much more likely that a third way scenarion will occur.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_05_yblog.gifYblogZA uses the total eclipse of the moon as a metaphor for the downward spiral of South Africa largely due to the ANC.
Moeletsi Mbeki, brother of President Thabo Mbeki, told the Cape Argus that South Africans had to face the fact the rest of the world had reason to be "very concerned" about the direction in which the country was moving.

“[Moeletsi] Mbeki also criticised new ANC president Jacob Zuma for "bad-mouthing" his own country's political and justice system in a foreign country. Zuma claimed in court papers in Mauritius this week that fraud charges against him were part of a political move against him. Moeletsi Mbeki, who is deputy chairperson of the SA Institute of International Studies at the University of the Witwatersrand, said: "Here we have the president of the ANC, the possible future president of the country, claiming that the 16 charges of fraud against him are part of a political campaign to keep him out of office.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_06_khanya.gifKhanya has a philosophical discussion on “political and spiritual identity and personal values” and the separation of the church and state.
“Earlier today I got a message from another blogger about the liberation struggle in South Africa and its spiritual basis. Here are some preliminary thoughts, linked to the example above. I was a member of the Liberal Party, and while the humanist student in the example I gave was not, there were several others with views similar to his. The student whose banning we were protesting against was, however, both a Christian and a member of the Liberal Party. And one of the interesting things was that people with radically different religious backgrounds and worldviews were able to work together in a political party for common political goals. Christians, atheists, humanists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims and Hindus worked together for a common political goal of a democratic nonracial South Africa. Their reasons for pursuing that goal may have been very different, and almost opposite. But no matter what the reasons, they were able to agree on a political goal and a political programme.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_07_abahlali.gifhttp://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/349/feb26_08_blacklooks.gifBlack Looks has another report on the diamond empire of Israeli billionaire, Lev Leviev whose diamond mines in Angola have been cited for human rights violations and which fund illegal settlements in the West Bank and his real estate business in New York using underpaid workers in hazardous conditions.
“Leviev’s wealth was built while trading with a business that was a huge pillar of the South African apartheid regime. He then went on to use the proceeds to construct an apartheid reality in the West Bank.”

* Sokari Ekine blogs at Black Looks and www.africanwomenblogs.com

There she is, dead again,

that grandma with her jowls

and battered cardigan,

her headscarf and her

grainy backstreet photograph.

From week to week

her image stares to haunt us.

It’s the text that brings her

sharply into focus:

Loving mother of…

The grandma of…

An in-law through some cousin

to a councillor from such

and such a ward…

And, yes, the family will meet

at somewhere rural

and the hearse will leave

from such and such a Home

at 10a.m. (not prompt), proceed

to some small church

where she will Rest in Peace

Forever be Remembered

when Promoted to His Glory…

For us all, the same old story.

But her age in days like these,

her stunning age. Indeed,

the obit’s whole normality

earns which: our envy? Praise?.

*Stephen Derwent Partington, is the Kwani? poetry editor and a member of the Concerned Kenyan Writers Initiative.

**Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

These following notes, written by Daniel Volman, are based on the Conference on “Transforming National Security: Africom—An Emerging Command” Organized which was organized by the Center for Technology and National Security Policy of the National Defense University in Virginia from 19-20 February 2008.

Although the conference was open to the public, it was immediately clear that it was very much an “in group” affair explicitly held to bring together people from all the different agencies and African governments that will have to coordinate their activities to make Africom work. Thus, the conference itself was part of the process of organizing Africom. Technically, the conference was held under the NDU rules of “non-attribution,” i.e. participants can quote statements made at the conference, but are not supposed to identify speakers. I’ve complied with the rule in this memo, but just let me know if you want to know who said what.

About half of the audience of approximately 300 people (they said that this was the largest meeting devoted to Africom that has been held so far) were from the U.S. military services, mostly from the various agencies and departments that have been working through Eucom up until now and will now have to begin working with the new Africom HQ staff in Stuttgart. Most of the ones that I talked to were actually from Defense Intelligence staff, i.e. the people who decide to do with the intelligence information collected by the DIA and other agencies.

Then there were a substantial number of people from other departments, not just DoS and AID, but also Agriculture, Commerce, Judiciary, and others, since they all have programs in Africa that they will have to coordinate with Africom. And finally, there were a number of people from African embassies and governments, including both political and military personnel.

The conference was part of the ongoing effort of the Pentagon to actually get Africom going and to bring other countries into the structure, including by bringing their personnel into the Africom structure. I know that they organized a parallel conference in London, at the Royal United Services Institute, on 18-19 February to bring the Brits in, and I assume that they have/will do the same kind of thing to bring in the French and other European countries.

The conference was very much a nuts-and-bolts discussion of all the practical matters of making Africom work.

The first interesting thing was the discussion of how they define Africom’s mission. The presentation on this were based on internal DoD presentations, so they were much more honest and revealing than the kind of thing that comes from the public pronouncements. The presentation specifically cited the challenge of preventing disruptions in African oil production and exports as one of Africom’s six chief missions, along with meeting the challenge of China, controlling ungoverned regions and transnational extremism, dealing with instability in the Horn of Africa, dealing with instability in the Great Lakes region, and dealing with the situation in Chad/Sudan.

When one of the African representatives asked about China, they backtracked and said that Africom doesn’t see itself as a response to China and will seek to cooperate with China in the future. Africom is scheduled to produce a posture statement outlining its mission and intentions in March 2008.

A couple of other interesting points they made was to say that they saw the Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa (the people who are spearheading U.S. involvement in Somalia and Ethiopia) as a model for what Africom could do in the rest of the continent. They admitted that they had made no attempt to consult with anyone at the UN while they were developing Africom and hadn’t really consulted with anyone in Africa either.

It was clear from their statements that they were very surprised and unhappy about the public response from Africans to Africom and that this was the reason that they were going to have to keep the Africom HQ in Stuttgart for the time being, although they will continue to look for African hosts and will also work on ways to station Africom staff people in less obvious and provocative ways like sending small groups to liaison with selected African military forces. They want to believe that this is just a problem of public relations and that they just have to do a better job of explaining themselves. One of the new buzzwords in Africom is “active listening,” i.e. pretending to care what other people think.

Finally, on a purely practical matter, there was considerable discussion about just how much trouble they are having finding adequate personnel and developing the kind of linkages and working relations with the agencies they will have to depend upon to actually do anything. This is all taking them a great deal of time and it’s clear that they will not really be ready when they become operational on 1 October. They’re worried that the difficult process of organizing Africom may actually disrupt U.S. military activities in Africa because the transition process itself will confuse everything.

* Daniel Volman is the director of the African Security Research Project in Washington, DC, and the author of numerous articles on US security policy and African security issues.

* Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

We, civil society organisations, including farmers, workers, women's, faith-based and students' groups and organisations, call on our people to redouble their efforts to stop the self-serving free trade agreements, misleading designated as 'Economic Partnership Agreements' that Europe seeks to impose on African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, and which will destroy the economies of these countries.