Over four hundred demonstrators were taken into custody after protests were staged in 34 urban centres in Zimbabwe yesterday (13 September). In this paper Maggie Makanza explores why the opposition in Zimbabwe has not been effective. She asks: “Why has the pro-democracy movement not been able to capitalise on the many reported failures of the ZANU (PF) government?” She explains that the reason the people of Zimbabwe have not revolted against the Mugabe regime is because although they agree on the need for change, they are unsure about where the MDC is taking them.

Why has the pro-democracy movement not been able to capitalise on the many reported failures of the ZANU (PF) government? Some people say all the necessary conditions needed for combustion to happen exist in Zimbabwe. All that is needed is a spark.

Most pressure for reform appears to be coming from external rather than internal forces. There have been calls for the international community to intervene and for President Thabo Mbeki to 'do something' about the Zimbabwean crisis. Such efforts as we know have not yielded any results.

If anything, positions have hardened and the situation continues to deteriorate at an alarming rate. There is something special about one who has the ability to laugh at one's situation in spite of its gravity. That person has transcended the boundaries of what others call normal and refuses provocation. Zimbabweans have that 'collective character' that the world has termed the 'great Zimbabwean mystery'. Should you ask them, how are things in Zimbabwe, the response without fail is “Zvakaoma”. Meaning, it is 'tough'. It is an abnormal response for one not to be outraged in the face of extreme provocation. Let’s explore why.

The Change Equation

The change equation tells us that change equals the degree of dissatisfaction with one's current situation, plus a compelling and attractive vision for the future. The assumption has been that if we increase the level of discomfort and suffering of the Zimbabwean people, change will inevitably come. It has not despite the fact that Zimbabweans were rated as the unhappiest lot in the world (survey in June, 2006).

While we as a nation are clearly dissatisfied with our current reality, specifically the economic situation, the forces for democratic change have failed to provide Zimbabweans with a compelling and attractive vision of the future. While people agree on the need for change, they are unsure of where the MDC is taking them.

The end state is not clear. Is it simply about a change of government or more so, a change of rulers? There has been a lack of clarity on the political position of the pro-democracy forces on key and emotive issues like the land reform programme. Discontent alone is not sufficient as a rallying point for change.

On the other hand, the ruling party ZANU (PF) had a potentially compelling and attractive vision of the future given our liberation history and the primary reason why we fought a war(s). Notice that I use the word potential, because it has not been realised. They failed to package their vision of transforming Zimbabwe and did not sufficiently share it with the masses.

The people of Zimbabwe have therefore questioned their motives for propelling the land question forward at this point in time. The poor and chaotic implementation of the Land Reform programme, shrouded in corruption and greed by officers in high places, has made it difficult for people to buy into the ZANU (PF) vision of the future.

Also, it must be noted that while it is an acknowledged fact that those of us in the Diaspora have been disenfranchised by the Mugabe regime, there is a general disengagement by Zimbabweans from active participation in politics. We are usually resigned to being armchair critics. This disengagement is evidenced in the ways external people express themselves in reference to the MDC and ZANU (PF). You hear people saying 'what the MDC should do is………or ZANU (PF) should do A, B and C to get the economy back on track'. These statements are telling. They show a clear distancing of oneself from these two major political parties.

The lack of energy and inertia to fight the regime could partly be explained by what I will term a latent support for the ZANU(PF) programmes and policies, specifically with regards to the Land Reform program and Mugabe's position on imperialism and neo-colonialism. The opposition has worked on the false assumption that no one supports ZANU(PF). This assumption has largely informed the politics of protest by the MDC and other opposition forces, which is naïve for a group fighting for democracy.

According to Machiavelli in his book “The Prince”, when you introduce a new order of things, you face resistance from those who stand to lose from a change in the status quo, and you must know that you have only a few lukewarm supporters of change who might benefit from the new order. There are a lot of people currently benefiting from the status quo. So why change something that you are benefiting from? They are working tirelessly and conspiring with the regime to make change impossible.

Democracy and governance amid poverty

The rural constituency has largely been misunderstood and underestimated. Through the arrogance of the political elite, they have often been used during elections and thereafter abandoned. They have clearly expressed their displeasure at the failed promises by the current regime to deliver. An attempt to show this displeasure was expressed in the many Parliamentary and Presidential elections since independence.

But they learned quickly. They now perceive politicians as an interruption to their serene and daily living. So, through a series of elections they have learned that this process is not beneficial to them in any way as it does not change their lives. The rural electorate have therefore decided to play games. 'Give the urbanites their votes and let them go back to Harare with minimal fuss. We will not see them for another five years'.

Voting is the power to decide. The act of giving somebody the power to decide their future assumes that one indeed has the power within their hands to make their own decision. This assumption is a complete fallacy. In a situation where poverty is rife and ignorance abounds, elections simply become a process whereby those who have access to resources abuse those who do not.

What is needed is radical change to the instruments for operationalising democracy in developing economies. The continued use of the ballot box under the present circumstances can only be described as sheer madness. Why continue to do the same thing when you know that that getting a so-called partial Electoral Commission to preside over the process is impossible? When the nature of humans is that of self-preservation and protection, why should the ruling party level the playing field?

The framework for democracy as currently conceptualised has become the source of much pain and suffering for the people of Zimbabwe. The last elections in Zimbabwe are a clear case in point. As one writer said 'it was a predictable surprise'. The results of the last election in Zimbabwe make a complete mockery of the people of Zimbabwe, but illustrate how as a developing country we have been fooled. Fooled to believe that democracy comes through an election process, that democracy comes through a box - transparent or not.

Humour and Cynicism - A Survival Strategy for Zimbabweans

The internet and the streets of Harare, Bulawayo Gweru, Mutare and the Diaspora abound with jokes and humour about the political scenario in Zimbabwe. It takes a different mindset, of defeating your enemy without fighting, hunger without starving, and diseases without allowing it to kill you. The ordinary people in Zimbabwe are challenging the premise that you have to fight hunger with food, and violence with violence. There is hope - zvichapera - it will end. This too shall come to pass.

And indeed, instead of fighting the regime, risking leg and limb, fighting that which will in time come to pass is by many seen as an exercise in futility. Many have resolved to wait and watch for the end of the regime’s time. 'It will come' you hear them say. Perhaps Zimbabweans are responding to the Mugabe regime in this way because they have weighed up their options and are indeed responding in the best way possible.

The Shona people were the first to capitulate to white rule in the 1890's, having realised that they would not win the war. They surrendered only to rise up decades later when they felt that they were much stronger. It is actually a recommended war strategy, to retreat in the face of a strong opposition. In the face of a strong enemy, you do not commit suicide, but retreat to regroup when the time is right. Perhaps.

Language plays a major role in the way people think. Our thought processes in turn influence the way we approach problems and find solutions to problems, and subsequently the way we behave. The humour used by most Zimbabweans is a way of playing with words and language to interpret the current events. In a way, the humour has developed into a second language for Zimbabweans, allowing them to talk about the painful situation without actually talking about it.

Often, the humour trivialises the issue and distances it from the person. In most cases, the humour is intellectual, creatively playing with words and abstracts from the current reality. Trivialised, reality therefore loses its power to demoralise and dehumanise its victim.

Towards collective responsibility and the building of a culture of tolerance and valuing diversity

I have often asked this question and risked losing life and limb. I know I am treading on a hornet's nest and risk assault. But I will pose the question anyway. Is Mugabe the real problem or the only problem in Zimbabwe? If Mugabe goes, will that solve our real problem?

I think Mavhaire was the first to make the 'Mugabe must go' call. If Mugabe goes, it will certainly solve the immediate economic isolation and bring back the IMF and World Bank, facilitate economic recovery and improved international relations. It will not however solve our fundamental problems as the people of Zimbabwe.

There is a culture of lack of tolerance for divergent views at all levels of society. I know of family disputes that have gone on for generations because they could not agree on certain issues or 'vakapumhana uroyi'. I know of churches that have split because the leadership did not agree on certain areas. Political parties have split because they could not tolerate different views or agree on the way forward. In the private sector, you hear very similar stories of 'camps' in the organisation. Perhaps it is the way we deal with conflict as a people.

The culture of intolerance is a big problem in Zimbabwe, as well as the lack of unity of purpose in each and every one of us. Selfishness and individualism has ruined us. There is need for us to look at ourselves in the mirror and admit that Mugabe is not the only problem in Zimbabwe. That in our own ways, we have individually and collectively contributed to the situation that we find ourselves in.

What roles can the Zimbabweans in the Diaspora play?

So, do Zimbabweans in the Diaspora have a role to play? Frankly I do not think we can play any significant role in the politics in Zimbabwe from the comfort of our adopted countries or cyberspace.

Yes, we can continue to play the role of breadwinners providing for those relatives who remain in Zimbabwe. There is no way that people can survive on the salaries that they are taking home in Zimbabwe. So how are Zimbabweans coping with the prices of goods and services, which are in no way linked to the pay cheques that people take home? The Diaspora has been sustaining and fuelling these price hikes. The Diaspora has significantly contributed to price and income distortions in Zimbabwe. The breadwinner role of the people in the Diaspora has only served to delay the process of change as it ameliorates and smothers the suffering and creates the false impression that local people are coping. That, unfortunately, is the law of unintended consequences.

Conclusion

The Zimbabwean crisis is like a big party where the invited guests come to the table and the hosts are nowhere to be seen. My call to all Zimbabweans both at home and in the Diaspora, is to come to the 'party'. Stand up and be counted. Whether you are an MDC or ZANU (PF) or whatever political persuasion you are, please show up otherwise this democracy game will remain a concept.

• This is an edited version of a paper presented at the Public Discussion forum hosted by the Zimbabwe Social Forum. Maggie Makanza is a member of the Zimbabwe Social Forum, a psychologist by training. She can be contacted at: [email][email protected]

• Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Shaikha Haya bint Rashid Al Khalifa yesterday took over the presidency of the UN General Assembly from the outgoing president of the 192-member body, Swedish Foreign Minister Jan Eliasson.

Vice President Atiku Abubakar has taken the case against his indictment by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Federal Government Admini-strative Panel of Inquiry to court, asking that it be quashed because it had no basis in law.

Pambazuka News is amongst the list of nominations by PoliticsOnline for those who are changing the internet and politics. Last year we were in the top ten.

This year it would be great to win it!

The awards work according to a voting system - you can click on the link below to cast your vote:

Please cast your vote now, the deadline for voting is 1 October 2006.

Campaign for Accountable Governance through Elections, (CAGE) has requested the Code of Conduct Bureau to urgently publish the names of current public officials who have failed to comply with asset declaration requirements under the 1999 Constitution.

Government military planes, vehicles and troops were flooding in and out of the military hub Abeche in eastern Chad on Wednesday (September 14) following fighting with rebels in the region earlier this week.

New buildings sprout like mushrooms across Kigali's skyline but this splash of modernity in a once rundown capital city belies a grimmer reality: thousands of poor have been pushed out to make way for these structures and still await resettlement.

The two top teams spearheading reforms to the Constitution have fallen out -only moments after meeting for the first time. The split led to the Parliamentary Committee on Justice and Constitutional Affairs proposing that they alone should focus on agreeing a draft of minimum reforms that could be enacted before the next General Election.

Apainyassi is Senegalese. Yet, he says he plans to cast a vote in The Gambia's presidential elections later this month - in fact, he's already been issued with a voter card. Apainyassi, who doesn't want to give his full name, says he feels a greater affinity for his adoptive home and sees no reason why he shouldn't vote in the election.

'African Bullets & Honey' - (http://bulletsandhoney.blogspot.com/2006/09/is-digital-indaba-internet-…) takes issue with the Digital Indaba on Blogging taking place in Johannesburg this week. He sees the conference as a way of “codifying” the African blogosphere which will end up excluding those who cannot or do not wish to participate rather than produce an inclusive blogging environment. A kind of colonisation process is taking place by those that seek to codify and appropriate the knowledge and ideas which are individual to each and every blogger. In short, the very aspect of blogging that makes it unique and differentiates it from the mainstream media, is being challenged.

“What really pulls my goat among all the ills of this 'inclusive' event is the corralling of bloggers – most of whom are just doing their own thing – into the donor universe. Consider once again the language of the Indaba which views blogging, at least in one aspect, thus:

“Blogging, because of its far reach and networking qualities, is an essential tool in ensuring that the UN Millennium Development Goals are achieved in Africa and NEPAD remains a united and benevolent alliance on the continent.”

But it is not just the “codifying of the African blogosphere” that annoys Bullets and Honey. It is the idea that African bloggers are being manipulated by a group of white “managers” or blogosphere elites who want to show that we African bloggers are not simply “passive observers in the global village”, but also that there is the possibility of a “market” or commercial opportunity not to be missed – a kind of new Blogging “scramble for Africa”. This ties in well with other ongoing campaigns such as “keep a child alive” fronted by Gwyneth Paltrow posing as an African in the “We are all Africans” poster .

“That we should now blog to show the world (read the West and white folks) that we are somehow worthy of their respectful consideration. What nonsense. Perhaps the way to 'show the world' is to have a conference of black people in the audience listening to panels basically made up of white people. You know? To hope that the authority of whiteness rubs off on the poor little African blogosphere. I wish I will be proven wrong about such panels but the defensiveness of the white Mandelas tells the tale. Ultimately though, whoever the panellists are, and despite the 'rush for white,' the logic of this benignly conducted colonisation of Africa's blog universe will have plenty of rainbow colored African volunteers.”

Kenyan Blog, 'You Missed This' You Missed This (http://kumekucha.blogspot.com/2006/09/sumbeiywo-biography-good-soldier…) comments on the biography of General Lazarus Sumbeiywo which he says has many inconsistencies that contradict earlier reports. He also considers that much of the material in the book is a threat to national security.

“The account of the coup and the President’s confidence does not tally with other eyewitness reports including this blogger’s (see my other post on this). At a time when the nation is trying to fill in the blanks on some very important and crucial events in her history, accuracy is very important and this is not really the time to do Andrew-Morton-like biographies designed to clean up images of past administrations. (Andrew Morton was Princess Diana’s biographer who also wrote an infamous biography on former president Moi that claimed foreign minister Ouko’s assassination was masterminded by fellow-Luo and powerful PS in the office of the president Hezekiah Oyugi for reasons to do with Luo politics.)”

'Grandiose Parlour' - Grandiose Parlor (http://grandioseparlor.blogspot.com/2006/09/dont-talk-about-my-nigeria…)
Reports on an article by Chizoma Sandra Nwachukwu who disparages Nigerians abroad for criticising the government and Nigerian society.

My fellow Nigerians, stop speaking from a point of ignorance. Purpose to change the status quo. You don't need military might. Just build ties with your people. Stop writing and criticizing the government. Even though it is not living up to its responsibilities, it is better than you are because it is doing something..."

Nwachukwu assumes that all Nigerians abroad are ignorant of what is happening in their country. This is false – we all read the newspapers, talk to friends and relatives and in some cases carry out business activities. To say that the government should not be criticised because, unlike us in the Diaspora it is doing something, makes no sense. Anyone and everyone is entitled to make whatever criticisms they choose of the Nigerian government and any other government.

Nigerian technology blogger, 'Oro' -

“There is, however, a different class of young people in Nigeria. They are passionate, focused, daring… but not empowered. The world they live in is a different one and it has been referred to by those who should know as a global village – in fact, Thomas Friedman dared to call it a flat world.

In this world, location should not matter. In this world, the Internet, new technologies and other forces of globalization should enable a young Nigerian (like his Indian or Ghanaian counterparts) earn more – and live better – without the need to apply for a visa. Unless, of course, he decides to travel for a well-deserved vacation or necessary appointment. Why is it a should-be story? I would argue that the reasons are not far-fetched: young Nigerians see the new opportunities on cable networks and on the Internet; we hear of them when we connect with our friends through Skype; we dream of them after reading past editions of The Economist or Time’s features on Innovation. But one single factor that can help us take the next leap is missing. Internet access in Nigeria is plug and pray, not plug and play – and that is even if you can afford it”

'Egyptian Chronicles' - Egyptian Chronicles (http://egyptianchronicles.blogspot.com/2006/09/end-of-blockade-and-star…) comments on what she describes as the new occupation of Lebanon – this time it is UNIFAL – the UN army in Lebanon.

“The Unifal will guard the Lebanese shores and airports, and also the northern borders between Syria and Lebanon too.

The Unifal will search any luggage in the harbors and airports with weight more than 20 kg as Katyusha missiles are weighted 67 kg!

The French army is back again to Lebanon after 51 years of independence with thousands of soldiers ,same as the Turkish which will return back to Lebanon after 88 years of independence from the Turkish Ottoman rule ,ironically I saw a report on CNN last week about the Lebanese Armani minority objection on the Turkish contribution in the Unifal troops , as some of you may know the Turkish Ottoman armies did massacres against the Armani people in Armani in WWI in year 1915 and till now the Armani people didn't forget it even those who live outside Armenian , anyway their objection got no importance because the Turks are coming back to Lebanon whether they like it or not.”

Israel has successfully deployed the UN as a proxy army to defend its own interests in Lebanon. So far despite offers from Indonesia and Bangladesh, no Muslim countries have been permitted to join the UN forces. Israel continues to make new demands, the latest of which is the deployment of armed UN troops along the entire Syria, Lebanon border. Egyptian Chronicle rightly concludes

“You know this reminds me with the time of colonialism, in the 1936 agreement between Egypt and UK , the British army would guard the Egyptian borders too in time of war….Well the age of colonialism is back again after all.”

'Gambian blogger', - Home of the Mandinmories (http://gambian.blogspot.com/index.html) comments on the 5th anniversary of 9/11: Much of the African blogosphere has been silent on 9/11, other than a few posts remembering those who were killed on that day 5 years ago. Mandinmories is the only one that takes a critical position on the direction of George Bush’s war on terror.

“With the September 11 anniversary around the corner, King George and his minions will be beating the war drums again. They will try to convince the citizens of this nation that Iran is coming to get us. Iran is the new bogey man. Remember the big bad wolf of Mesopotamia (Saddam)? He supposedly has weapons to annihilate civilization or that was the rational Georgie and his handlers told us what will happen if they don't get him first. We all know how well that thingy turned out. Yeah Saddam is in jail but Iraq is teetering on the brink of disintegration. What a noble venture it has turnout to be. In the last week or two they have started their disinformation campaign again. First defense secretary Rumsfeld compared anti war Americans to Nazi sympathizers in a speech to the American legion. He later claimed to be quoted out of context after a barrage of counter offensive from the other side led by MSNBC's Keith Oberman.”

'Black Looks' - Black Looks (http://www.blacklooks.org/2006/09/a_pact_against_freedom.html) has two posts in which she comments on the recent outings of gay men initially and then of lesbians last week by the Red Pepper magazine in Uganda. In the second outing, the news magazine calls on readers to phone in the names of neighbours so they (Red Pepper) can shame them by publicizing their names.

“The horrific events taking place in Uganda should be a wakeup call for everyone. People may think that they are safe from harassment and arrest because they are heterosexual. Not so, a witch hunt affects everyone irrespective of their sexuality. Your neighbour takes a disliking to you and before you know it you are being accused of being gay or a lesbian. People may think this is not their problem because they are not Ugandans. Think again, it happened in Cameroon, it’s happening in Ghana right now and with the new laws in Nigeria it may soon happen there. The fundamental human rights of African citizens are slowly being eroded in Uganda, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya and Cameroon as religious extremists and repressive governments join in a pact against freedoms.”

* Sokari Ekine produces the blog Black Looks, www.blacklooks.org

* Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

The government has all but banned a political party wanting self-rule for the Caprivi Strip in northeastern Namibia, drawing strong criticism from human rights organisations on the grounds that this is "unconstitutional". "No UDP [United Democratic Party] meetings will be allowed in the Republic of Namibia from 1 September.

With dozens, if not hundreds of organisations likely to attend next year's World Social Forum (WSF) -- and almost as many issues clamouring to be addressed there -- nailing down a programme for the Jan. 20-25 event promises to be a daunting task. Nonetheless, organisers of the event are starting to do just that this week according to the website of the WSF, which is to be held in the Kenyan capital of Nairobi.

Prime Minister Charles Konan Banny has been unable to implement the roadmap that was to have secured for Côte d’Ivoire a democratically legitimated government. As happened a year ago, there will be no presidential election on the date (currently 31 October 2006) mandated by the UN Security Council.

Harvard has released a study revealing that permanent members increase their foreign aid to countries elected to serve on the Council for two years. Through mathematical formulas and government data on foreign aid, the report makes the case of vote buying and arm-twisting of elected members during that period.

Scrolling down Pambazuka News 268, I noted with surprise these words in the introduction to “THE HOPES AND ILLUSIONS OF WORLD TRADE LIBERALISATION FOR WOMEN IN AFRICA” (http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/36859: “Africa has faced ten years of unfettered liberalisation that, argues Cheikh Tidiane Dièye, has left the continent on its knees.” Further down, in Sokari Ekine’s REVIEW OF AFRICAN BLOGS (http://www.pambazuka.org/en/issue/current/#cat_6), there was this paragraph from Ethiopundit: “As we discussed in Short Term Memory, Cheerleaders and Sachs & Violence, there is a long tradition of intellectuals 'adopting' African tyrants stretching back to those 'romantic' revolutionaries Nkrumah and Nyerere and their destruction of the Ghanaian and Tanzanian economies and societies. All that is needed from a tyrant is to speak the right progressive language while flattering their ferenji intellectual sponsors - even as boots stomp the faces of and impoverish the 'people' everyone pretends to be so concerned about.”

Just very quickly, the person who wrote the intro to Dièye’s article should reckon on at least 25 years of unfettered liberalisation that has kept Africa on its knees. We can use 1980 as a crude marker for the early “structural adjustment” programmes. We have to keep as long and sharp a perspective as possible in order to recognize old policies in new clothes.

Secondly, Sokari Ekine seems to agree with the Ethiopundit paragraph. I would suggest that Nkrumah and Nyerere did not achieve the destruction of their respective colonial economies and societies but they certainly tried.

This is just to raise a question about the quality of memory, analysis and patience. Looking critically at where we are roughly 50 years after “independence”, perhaps we should take more time when criticizing those early leaders with vision and programmes of qualitative change.

The elephant in the living room of the corruption debate is the role played by the global infrastructure of banks, legal and accounting businesses, tax havens and related financial intermediaries in providing an offshore interface2 between the illicit and the licit economies.

Building an effective and accountable way to fund science and technology across Africa is a major challenge facing the region's leaders and scientific communities. You are invited to join the debate. A few years ago, proposals for an African Science and Innovation Facility (ASIF) emerged from a group of African science ministers, meeting under the auspices of the New Partnership for Economic Development. This is the latest effort to build an institution that will meet the continent's science and technology needs, and its biggest challenge will be to avoid the fate of its predecessors. In January 2007, the African Union will hold its 8th annual summit, focusing on science, technology and innovation and organised with support from NEPAD. This autumn, a number of meetings will take place to prepare and discuss proposals including a model law to regulate biotechnology across the continent, the role of the African diaspora and a new financing facility to support African research. SciDev.Net has grouped its coverage of these issues, key documents relating to the summit, links, and an invitation to join our related discussion group. Join the debate at

FEATURED: Cheikh Tidiane Dièye introduces a special issue on trade and women's rights, arguing that women, more than any other group, suffer the weight of the constraints of poverty largely brought about by the world trade system
COMMENT AND ANALYSIS:
- Roselynn Musa points out that the voices of women and poor people are largely missing from trade policy negotiations
- Salma Maoulidi asks what does trade mean for women in the East Africa region.
- Mohau Pheko argues that the July collapse of World Trade Organisation talks aimed at fostering a global free trade regime is actually an unexpected bonus
- Facts, figures, questions and answers on trade and women, compiled by Pambazuka News Staff
PAN-AFRICAN POSTCARD: Tajudeen Abdul Raheem on the AU, the UN and the Sudanese government
BLOGGING AFRICA: Sokari Ekine interrogates the political situation in Zimbabwe, racism in South Africa, the Darfur Crisis
BOOKS AND ARTS: Reinventing Development
CONFLICT AND EMERGENCIES: Links to news on Sudan, Somalia, Uganda
HUMAN RIGHTS: Great Lakes Summit kicks off
WOMEN AND GENDER: Fact sheet on reforming gender architecture in the UN
REFUGEES AND FORCED MIGRATION: Spain vows to curb migrant wave
ELECTIONS AND GOVERNANCE: Will Congo explode?
DEVELOPMENT: Preface to global poverty or global justice
CORRUPTION: Firms admit paying bribes in world bank program
HEALTH AND HIV/AIDS: ARVS becoming big business
EDUCATION: Zim University to teach Chinese language and culture
RACISM & XENOPHOBIA: Complaint of racial division in the newsroom
ENVIRONMENT: Bringing the earth back to life
LAND AND LAND RIGHTS: Vice president’s daughter grabs farm
MEDIA AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Beyond propaganda
DIASPORA: Haiti, shocking Lancet study
INTERNET AND TECHNOLOGY: NEPAD’s IT project faces failure
PLUS: e-Newsletters and Mailings Lists; Fundraising and Useful Resources; Courses, Seminars and Workshops; Jobs.

Reinventing Development: Translating rights-based approaches from theory into practice. Paul Gready and Jonathan Ensor (eds) Zed Books £16.95 ISBN 1842776495

In the aftermath of the Second World War, mass mobilizations swept the African continent, as people in villages, farms and cities demanded the right of self-determination and an end to colonial subjugation. The independence governments that were subsequently swept into power proposed that the path to self-determination should be through what Western governments described as ‘development’, seen as the universal panacea for the problems of ‘underdevelopment’.

Despite the haziness of the term, it had a certain progressive ring – implicit in the idea of development was that of emancipation, which had inspired millions to support the movement for independence. And it was in this that the modern missionaries – the development NGOs – found their raison d’être.

By the end of the 20th century, the appeal of development had waned. Twenty years of structural adjustment programmes had reversed nearly all the gains of independence, removing the right of African people to determine their own social and economic policies, rendering their governments less and less accountable.

Development NGOs were experiencing a crisis of credibility as their development programmes came to be perceived as part of the so-called ‘Washington consensus’ agenda. Development had lost its emancipatory appeal. It was in need of reinvention.

Amartya Sen was probably among the first to recognize this in his call to reassert the link between development and freedom. [1] Others gradually took up the cry, until even the World Bank became a proponent of ‘the rights-based approach to development’.

The appeal was obvious: human rights has – as development once had – an association with something that is implicitly participatory and emancipatory. But has the new dogma changed anything in practice? Has it led to poverty being recognized as a massive human rights violation that kills millions prematurely every year? Has it resulted in bringing to account those who are responsible for and benefit from the impoverishment of humanity? Has it resulted in international agencies supporting movements claiming reparations for injustices? Has it meant resources being allocated to popular movements so they can exercise their collective power in support of their claims or defend themselves against attacks? What real difference has it made to the struggle for emancipation – the right to determine one’s one future?

With some notable exceptions, there were few answers to be found in this book. This collection of essays does, however, provide a remarkable insight into the current discourse among international development agencies about something that appears to be the new universal panacea for the poor. It shows that, like the term ‘development’ before it, the human rights approach to development has come to mean anything and everything to everyone.

For UNICEF, it is essentially an effective programming tool; for Oxfam International, it is business as usual, but recast using the new rhetoric. For CARE International in Rwanda, it provides a different analytical framework for its work but the solutions seem drearily similar to conventional approaches to development.

In Afghanistan, the rights-based approach is seen as necessary not so much to defend the rights of Afghanis but primarily as an advocacy tool (and, some might say, for strengthening negotiation for funds).

For ActionAid, the rights-based approach is radically different: they show that rights are fundamentally about enabling the poor and disenfranchised to organize, and thereby use their collective power in their own interest.

Instead of the traditional charitable and humanitarian response to the earthquake and communal violence in Gujarat, they understood the ‘need to take sides unambiguously with the poor’. The need for political action in relation to children’s participation is more cautiously acknowledged in Save the Children’s case study from Nepal.

Two valuable essays in this book seem strangely out of place. Ghalib Galant and Michelle Parlevliet from the South African Centre for Conflict Resolution make a strong argument for why conflict prevention and the struggle for human rights are inextricably linked – though how this relates to the rights-based approach to development is not made entirely clear. An excellent essay by Neil Jarman on human rights and peace-building in Northern Ireland discusses how human rights have moved to centre stage following the paramilitary ceasefire – though the term ‘rights-based approach to development’ is not once mentioned!

In addition to a series of case studies, there are more discursive essays on the concept of the rights-based approach – the introductory essay by the editors, an essay by Harsh Mander, an essay on rights and culture by Jonathan Ensor, and a helpful summary and conclusion by Olivia Ball. I was struck by the fact that none of these essays sought to address the nature and scale of human rights violations taking place in so-called developing countries.

Injustice, crimes against humanity, genocide, gender-based violence, child abuse, war, torture, occupation, the use of state sponsored terror and its mirror image of non-state terror – topics that are the normal focus of human rights discourse – were mentioned at best only peripherally, if at all. Do these subjects have no relevance to the discourse on rights and development? Their absence lends weight to the sense that the discourse on rights-based development is just a new spin on an old, and rather discredited, concept of development.

• Firoze Manji is Executive Director of Fahamu and editor of Pambazuka News.

• This article first appeared in the September edition of Alliance Magazine.
Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Notes:
[1] Amartya Sen (1999) Development as Freedom Oxford: OUP.

The African Union has given notice that it is not going to continue its Peace Mission beyond the end of this month when the mandate expires. Khartoum's initial response was more or less: “Good riddance” though it has now 'modified' its position to include impossible conditions under which it may 'allow' the African Union troops to remain.

The Sudanese government wants the Mission to be financed by itself and the Arab League. This is obviously a condition that the AU cannot accept and has rightly refused to countenance. In addition, the Sudanese government has categorically rejected the UN Security Council Resolution 1706.

The African Union Peace Keeping Mission in Darfur has been faced with many challenges. One, the experience is new and consequently there were lots of obstacles to be dealt with. Two, the mandate was too limited, and, therefore, it has been unable to embark on peace enforcement that could have saved more lives. In a sense, it is an AU mission based on the old OAU fudge. Three, it never had enough resources to carry out its limited mission effectively.

But by far the biggest challenge is the bad faith of the Sudanese government. Also, too many external interests have been impacting on the conflict.

These challenges have contributed to the misconception that Africans cannot resolve their problems themselves. The fact that the Mission was put together was a positive step towards confirming that Africans and our political leaders were no longer prepared to be indifferent to the suffering of other Africans.

That Rwanda and Nigeria both immediately offered troops was also an expression of this Pan African Solidarity. Rwanda knows only too well the consequences of apathy and indifference. On the other hand, the Nigerians have always regarded Africa as the “centre piece” of the country’s Foreign Policy and have always sought to put their money where their mouth is.

I am not enamoured by Obasanjo at all but I must concede that he has remained consistent on Pan African Issues. In the case of Sudan, Nigeria has been engaged from time immemorial largely because both countries are superficially similar but also because there is a long association between the peoples.

The North-South ethno-regional - racialist and religious fault lines in Sudan are very familiar to Nigeria. Therefore successive Nigerian governments have tried to be peace-makers in Sudan. There is also the fact that there are a significant number of Sudanese people who may be of Nigerian origin.

One of the most difficult challenges that the AU had to confront was the limited nature of their mandate. Due to this weakness, the Sudanese government was able to outmanoeuvre the AU. It played the AU against the UN / USA and got a weakened intervention force.

The Sudanese government also exploited the United States of America’s low credibility and the anti-Americanism that Bush’s war without end continues to generate among many Africans and peoples of the world. The US is the only government that has officially declared that what is happening in Darfur is nothing short of genocide.

This should have put an obligation on both the US government and the rest of the member states of the UN to abide by the Geneva Convention. Neither the US nor the other states have discharged that responsibility. The US cannot do so because nobody will believe it, especially after it waged a unilateral war on Afghanistan and Iraq.

In practice, the AU force has been toothless because of the limited mandate. This should be enough reason to review the way in which the Peace and Security Council (PSC) operates. It is not a case for abolition - rather it is a case for wider reform so that it is able to intervene effectively.

The issue of resources have to be dealt with seriously. Almost all organs of the Union are handicapped by lack of money, not just the PSC operations. It is simply unacceptable and should be indefensible that we cannot fund the AU on our own given the enormous resources wasted by governments across this continent.

Why are we able, ready and willing to spend money on Presidential vanities and unjust wars but have no resources for peace and development? Why should anybody take us seriously if we do not take ourselves seriously?

However, whatever internal resources we generate, should not mean that Africa cannot and should not avail itself of global resources both material and immaterial. We are part and parcel of the international community. Any threat to our peace and security is a threat to the rest of the international community.

Africans have been helping to make, keep and maintain peace across the world from Bosnia to Lebanon, and, therefore there is nothing wrong in asking others to help us too.

It is clear that extremist elements are now in control of policy in Khartoum. Whether President Bashir is a willing or unwilling prisoner is difficult to say categorically. Sometimes politicians prefer to be seen as ‘powerless’ even as they may be in full support of the unpopular direction their government may be embarking.

These extremists see peace negotiations as weakness. They fear that Darfur may be on the road to some form of independence, like the South. In that way of thinking they are willing to disorganise any peace negotiation.

It is telling that the key moderate voices of past negotiations are very quiet now. The most important of these voices is that of the second Vice President, Ali Osman Taha. As evidence to show that Bashir is firmly ensconced with his extremist hegemonists, he reportedly swore he will never allow the UN into Sudan and instead was prepared to go to Darfur and fight himself.

But the government is not the only villain. Some of the rebel leaders themselves do not want any peace resolution, and still others suffer from inflated opinions of themselves. Right from the start, many of the rebel leaders never wanted an AU force.

That ruse has now been exposed for what it is: bad faith by a government bent on killing its own peoples. There is a need for both the AU and the UN to call Khartoum's bluff.

By stating its exit date, the AU has already taken a clear position. The ball is now in the court of the UN whose July 31 resolution was made under the enforcement chapter of the UN Charter. AU members are also members of the UN and part of that decision. Therefore we may leave as the AU but return to protect fellow Africans as part of the UN Force.

• Dr Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is General-Secretary of the Pan African Movement,
Kampala (Uganda) and Co-Director of Justice Africa

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