Author: denisbogere

by

Whose responsibility is it to protect.

A very interesting debate between my comrades on the legality of intervention has prompted me to ask Whose responsibility is it to protect because when one looks out of the window the globe does not seem to be a global village but rather a global jungle engulfed in current ideological extremism and conflicts in Central African Republic, Darfur, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eastern Chad, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Kashmir. The challenges facing these states as well as the intentional community are thus not limited to dealing with the recurring cycles of violence in these countries but also include the chronic poverty that accompanies this violence. Also terrorists groups namely the al-Qaeda Organization in the Maghreb (AQIM) or al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Islamic Salvation Front (Fis), Jamat Tawhid Wal Jihad Fi Garbi Afriqqiya (Movement for Monotheism and Jihad in West Africa) and al-Shabaab all these groups are challenging the international order as we know it now in the name of justice. One asks can human security establish an unblemished free political order?  

The map below shows current conflicts worldwide.

Map (1)

The most distinct feature of the international system today is interdependence—Fostered by advancements in communication and transportation technology, integrated markets and increasingly irrelevant borders, and globalization which is the engine behind this interdependence as drastically transformed traditional security to reflect the changes and needs in our international system. Among the variety of transformations observed is the concept of human security which places its emphasis on the individual rather than the state. However, recent events indicate that the state is still the primary emphasis as a unit of organization.

Human Security is anchored within international law on humanitarian intervention. International law spells out the basis for intervention embodied in 3 principles:

There is convincing evidence of extreme, large-scale humanitarian distress;

There is no practical alternative to the use of force if lives are to be saved;

The use of force must be proportionate and aimed at relieving a human crisis.

To those of us who are students of politics, human security presents the unorthodox approach that the international community needs to meet the challenges that we face today. These challenges include trafficking of weapons, transitional crime, piracy, terrorism, terrorist breeding grounds and sanctuaries, rear bases for warlords, refugee overflows, and protracted conflicts that not only threaten regional but global peace and security. Human security seeks to build governments that endeavor to make a real difference in people’s lives this includes security, basic services and job creation. Human security also calls for building functional governments with the capacity of ensuring law and order.

Human security looks at all the above variables as threats to regional and global peace and lends its security, material and moral support to deal with these threats during, before or after they happen. In human security we find the principles of freedom from want (material well-being) and freedom from fear (security) which is people centered and necessary. Freedom from fear as the term is often used refers to protecting individuals from violent conflict that has its roots in poverty, weak state institutions and other forms of inequality. Freedom from want on the other hand places its emphasis on eradicating hanger and disease because they have the potential to cause economic, social and political instability. Freedom from fear and want are consistent with the obligation of the state to look after the welfare of its citizens. This brings us full cycle whose responsibility is it when a state cannot meet its obligation and whose responsibility is it in achieving Human security. 

 

 

by

My Quarrel with “Dead Aid” written by Dambisa Moyo

Dambisa Moyo argues that aid (development aid) is the cause of Africa’s underdevelopment. This argument hardly holds water.

Correlating Africa’s underdevelopment to aid betrays a misunderstanding of the malignant nature of poverty -not even to mention that correlation doesn’t necessarily explain causation. According to her,“the answer to Africa’s economic underdevelopment has its roots in aid.” (P.6)

Thus Africa’s underdevelopment is not caused by;

Rampant poverty?

Lack of Infrastructural development?

Absence of Foreign Direct Investment?

HIV aids?

Poor governance?

Tropical Diseases like Malaria?

Famine?

Geographic Impediments?

Lack of access to markets?

Absence of technology?

Structural Adjustments Programs (SAPS)?

Illiteracy?

Poor sanitation which contributes to high mortality rate?

Geopolitics; e.g. Cold War when the West was more concerned in maintaining regimes like Mobutu’s at the expense of economic development in Africa?

None of the above explain Africa’s underdevelopment but aid, according to Moyo. In other words, if we simply stop aid, Africa’s economic development will take off like an eagle?

She does not seem to grasp the multicausal nature of poverty.

On the face of it, I find such an argument weak, but most importantly, it betrays her failure in understanding the root causes of poverty and the malignant dynamics of the poverty trap. Cancelling the debt is one part of the equation. And debt cancellation in and of itself will not bring economic development to the continent.

The other part of the equation requires the following;

1. Rich countries need to make good on their promise to raise development aid to 0.7% of their GNP. This promise was made in Monterrey in 2002. This amount is necessary to start denting poverty not only in Africa but around the world. This amount of aid is critical to have those living in extreme poverty have their feet on the first rung of the ladder of economic development as it will make it possible to target infrastructural deficiencies, combat illiteracy, improve agricultural production by raising crop yield, assault malaria and HIV aids. Such a concerted effort will generate the much-needed economic growth needed to lift people out of poverty.

2. Such commitment ought to be sustainable over a defined period of time. According to Jeffrey Sachs, who did an amazing job studying and understanding the dynamics of poverty, the period ought to be at least 10 years.

3. More accountability for the use of aid as it has been poorly structured and squandered. Both aid donors and aid recipients share responsibility for this. During the Cold War, aid was not a sincere attempt to take on poverty in Africa. Those giving aid had as political calculus maintaining clientelist regime in their camp hence accountability for aid usage was the least of their preoccupation, let alone ending poverty in Africa.

Furthermore, Dambisa Moyo swims into contradictions. She argues, rightly so, that aid has been misused by some regimes in Africa. For example, Mobutu. This is a classic example of aid misused for personal enrichment which ought not to be repeated. But yet, she dives into contraction arguing, the Continent needs “Benevolent Despots” to push for reforms.

How many benevolent despots will the continent need to pull out of poverty? She doesn’t say.

How long is benevolent despotism supposed to reign on the continent? The reader is left to guess.

How do we control for “Benevolence” in a putative despot? She is unresponsive.

How do we distinguish a “benevolent despot” from Mobutu, Paul Biya, Blaise Compaore, Eyademas in Togo, Bongos in Gabon, ObiangNguema in Equatorial Guinea, the very despots who have squandered aid? She has yet to enlighten us.

I cannot understand how and why she would start by arguing that aid has been mismanaged by the likes of Mobutu and turn around to advocate for benevolent despots in Africa. That strikes me as counter intuitive as Africa needs more accountability not less.

In the final analysis, her book does a great disservice to the cause of ending poverty and underdevelopment in Africa. It fails to run what Jeffrey Sachs calls a “differential diagnostics” to determine and demonstrate the multicausal nature of poverty and its malignant nature.

Worse still, her book is peddling racist stereotypes which explain Africa’s underdevelopment as the result of laziness on the part of Africans.

“Aid engenders laziness on the part of African policymakers.”(P. 66)

Ironically, halfway true her book she had an epiphany arguing; “However worthwhile the goal to reduce and even eliminate aid is, it would not be practical or realistic to see aid immediately drop to zero. Nor, in the interim, might it be desirable.”(P. 76)

Had she started by that realization maybe, just maybe, the book would have added something more in understanding the multicausal nature of poverty and bring forth some meaningful suggestions.

Edwile Vedel M.

Short Response to Edwile’s Quarrel with “Dead Aid” written by Dambisa Moyo

I think it’s disingenuous of my colleague to discredit Moyo’s take on aid and I think to suggest that she doesn’t grasp the poverty on the continent shows a total disregard of her contribution in understanding the relationship between developmental aid and Africa’s underdevelopment. I don’t think Moyo is conclusive that ending aid will lead development, but rather she rightfully says that aid is part of the problem among the many such as leadership and the other problems Edwile points out. I think Edwile has wasted a lot of intellectual capital trying to disprove what some of us already know him included that Africa’s underdevelopment has many moving parts. If Edwile wants answers on the other problems he should find other sources because I think Moyo’s book is specific with aid and not addressing all the problems that Africa is mired in.

Think about it if African leadership was serious enough to utilize its natural resources without the endemic corruption in which millions of dollars are lost annually then sure it is no rocket science that Africa wouldn’t need that much developmental aid. It is evident now that Africa’s endemic corruption is holding Africa hostage developmental wise. Our national budgets are overly reliant on aid as if we cannot harness our own resources. The question Edwile must ask is in spite of all the aid that has been poured into Africa why hasn’t Africa achieved the necessary economic development or traded itself out of perpetual poverty.

For the past 40 years or so African countries have been with the help of aid trying to attain self sustaining national economies, create markets and industries that would generate economic growth and development. In spite of that fact our manufacturing is in limbo we still produce raw materials that we cannot manufacture into final products.

This notion that Africa needs aid in order to develop is misplaced what Africa in my view needs is good leadership that is honest and can manage people’s expectation and ready to offer an ideological orientation that does not undermined Africa’s growth. In a nut shall aid eradication isn’t Africa’s answer to development or reducing poverty, but rather its one of the many tools in the tool kit that can force governments to think creatively and be responsible and accountable to how the national coffers are managed.

To be fair Edwile implicitly raises a question of how Africa has been betrayed by poor leadership on a number of fronts chief among them aid. African people need reliable governments that can deliver on the promise of development, prosperity and self-reliance for the people short of that we will be debating whether Moyo is RIGHT or WRONG on aid. Can African governments work for us and restore hope in our eyes.

Denis Bogere. 

by

The American Dream “Steal Chasing It”

I use STEAL instead of STILL to highlight its elusiveness. Below is how people from diffrent circles feel about the American Dream.
PRRI-American-Dream
America is the land of opportunity; the American Dream ideology informs us; the place where if you work hard and play by the rules, you can get ahead. The American dream ideology has hampered solidarity among the poor. The dream proclaims that anything is possible as long as a person works hard and long enough he/she can make it. I might argue that masks the inherent social, political and economic differences in America, by projecting an illusion that we live in a meritocracy with hopes for a better tomorrow, if that tomorrow comes. So we are taught that in order to achieve the American dream we must work hard, get an education, and find a good job, I guess this explains why some us are in school in order to participate in the American Dream. May be God willing we can achieve that elusive dream. As a result people do not question their place in the society if they believe that one day they will achieve upward class mobility. For capitalism to work effectively, companies and the government need individuals to socialize with the American Dream ideology. This market conformity is exemplified by Nobel (1997) when he attributes the lack of mobilization to social class between the business class and labor, government institutions (federalism), and race (individualistic political culture which is embedded in the American dream ideology) For example, government programs enacted to combat inequality do nothing more than maintain the status quo because these programs must be market conforming in which labor is weak. This partly explains the lack of a strong labor movement in America which has left the working class unorganized resulting into law class consciousness, hence high divisions amongst the class hierarchies, suggesting that American identity is more rooted in race rather than social class. In fact I might add that race is not the problem but racism is. Thus, the lack of a strong social class movement in America may help explain why today people are not demanding more from government. The graph below shows wealth distrubtion in America.
inequality-page25_actualdistribwithlegend
This is also evident in our immigration policy that tends to turn Americans against each other. In fact Kymlicka and Banting (2006) argue that solidarity is central for both having and expanding welfare. Thus, Kymlicka and Banting contend that increase in immigration decreases solidarity and decreases social welfare spending because it tends to divide people, echoing back to the issue of deservedness but in this case immigrants’ vs native. This can also be attributed to America’s contemporary history of racial relations. Furthermore, Kymlicka and Banting argue that the politicization of immigration, multiculturalism to be exact in which the failure to embrace our differences has unintended consequences of decrease in solidarity. As well as Dulio et al (2009) suggest that the lack of efficacy or the mistrust of poor people can be attributed to prior negative experiences with the government which can undermined their mobilization. As a result poor people are less inclined to be involved in shaping an effective government social policy if they believe that the government will not listen and represent their interests. For example TANF does not only shed light on the tensions between the poor but also that negative experience in which say questions of how many sexual partners a recipient has, and when was the last time a recipient had sex, leaves a bad test in the recipients mouth which prevents collective mobilization. During the Clinton administration, many citizens called for welfare reform because of their belief in individual responsibility and meritocracy. For many Americans, the policy reinforces the belief that individuals should work for what they receive. The primary goal was to reduce the number of people dependent on government support in lieu of employment. Many Americans assumed, from the resulting emphasis on self-sufficiency through employment, that wages were the way out of poverty. TANF, does not consider the job market, and lack of quality, and good paying jobs. The Idea of American Dream Ideology is a glass half empty or half full.

Related articles
by

Working Poor-Poverty in America: The New Poor and Old Poor

6145705880_9777d29f5e_b
The above number is scarily when you consider the fact that historically America has always honored the ethic of hard work and personal responsibility. Implying that hard work and personal responsibility can get you ahead in this country, however, millions of Americans are struggling, even when they have two or three jobs. We have a moral responsibility to help those who are doing everything they can to get by so that their work is rewarded, and live the American dream, however the irony is that some Americans are still stuck at jobs with poverty wages. The American ethos seem to be that everyone deserves a chance, but you’re supposed to make it on your own. But what happens if something that you have no control over suddenly happens like the current economic situation? Well then the debate turns to who deserves help and why. The “working poor” are Americans who work yet they are still unable to make ends meet, even as they work at two or more jobs. American “working poor” have jobs that don’t pay enough to cover their rent, healthcare, and the like. In essence these are Americans who work full time but live in poverty. The map below indicates the poverty percentages and Southern States seem to have the highest number of people living in poverty.
Areas With ConcentratedPoverty: 2006Ð2010
The “working poor” as in relation to the “new poor” who are considered to be middle class become the “old poor”. That is, the “working poor” become the “old poor” who are often characterized as undeserving in society due to bad choices they have made in life. And what is interesting is the way society will try to separate out the “new poor” from the “old poor” when determining who to give assistance to. The “new poor” are treated as more deserving of help, because it is not their fault that they are poor but forces beyond their control such the current economic situation is to blame. And indeed, the “new poor” are easier to help, as they are not entrenched in poverty as the “old poor” are. Society in many respects seems to forget that the “old poor” are a product of market failure in our capitalist society that is profit driven, and lacks the necessary incentives to help the poor out of poverty. So we give the “new poor” lots of help with no stigma. For instance we see our government eager to help home owners who lose homes in this economic down turn, extend unemployment benefits and the like to the deserving poor the “new poor”. In fact Gilens (1999) crystallizes how the media frames issues of deservedness by creating a sympathetic category and in this it is the “new poor” and the marginalized one the “old poor” fade in the background.

Related articles
by

It’s not illusions the Linkages within U.S Social Policy are Real

This business of cut and cut and spend and spend is obscuring a substantive debate about the U.S Social Policy. Social policy in its simplest form constitutes the needs of a society and how they are met. Social Policy in America is synonymous with the Tax code, Welfare programs, and Penal code and much more. These programs may appear separate to a common person but they are not.
Parallel policy as the term is often used refers to distinct policies that appear separate from each other but directly affect social policy. Understanding the current state of US social policy a linkage must be made among tax policy, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) policy, and the criminal justice policy. In essence what are the consequences of using the tax system and penal system as a platform for social policy implementation? Do the policies intentionally relate to each other, or supplement or substitute, or do they coexist. The expanded use of tax policy to achieve social policy objectives related to work and welfare according to Soss et al (2007) the government uses the tax code to find social welfare programs such as health care via business.
1
Hacker (2006) calls it the great shift because the responsibility for the provision of healthcare shifted from the government to the private sector. More and more social policy is being coordinated through the tax system. Survey data show that most Americans support a broader notion of the goals of welfare reform than just caseload reduction. Americans strongly hold the view that needy children should receive assistance. They are concerned that welfare may be a disincentive to work, but they want to help those who need it. In fact Soss et al (2007) argue that people tend to favor social welfare expansion but then questions arise of how these programs ought to be funded and who is expected to pay for the programs, especially when the rich are vehemently opposed to any form of increased income tax.
policybasics-statetaxdollars-REV4-12-13
The triumph TANF over ADFC is further evidence of the waning viability of the American welfare state. In fact Soss and Schram (2007) argue that democrats and republicans have vied for control of domestic policy where democrats have responded by disavowing their liberal heritage and moving toward the centre, in preferring lower tax rates, diminished government regulation, and federal subsidies for business. Soss et al (2007) furthermore argue that big business has portrayed the welfare state as detrimental to economic interests while Soss and Schram (2007) contend that sometimes conservatives claim that federal social program intrudes into the privacy of the people. Business, further contend that federal social program entailed burdensome taxes and subverted individual rights and responsibilities. In fact Beckett and Western (2001)argue that has government got more involved in people’s marginalized lives in more intrusive way than their means tested program such as TANF.
8-22-12tanf-f3
One of the main determinate of this is race Beckett and Western (2001) argue that the more African Americans in a state the more the state leans towards the exclusionary welfare state, and adopt a “lock them up mentality” as a result funding for TANF is reduced, while prison spending goes up. Inversely states with higher white population tend to favor the inclusionary/rehabilitative policies. The link being that in regards to tax system tax cuts lead to reduction of revenues, which results into reduction on spending on welfare programs and hence increase in spending in the system.
massincarceration_20110617_0 safetyinnumbers_infographic
Parallel social policies that appear to be separate are not separate the task is being able to find the linkages that lead to a better understanding of America’s social policy. These policies directly or indirectly have reciprocal effects on each other and the outcomes of their implementation have positive or adverse effects on society.

Related articles
by

Fundamentalism and democracy in Nigeria

What is the underlying issue driving the state of insecurity in Nigeria: is it terrorism by Boko Haram or ethnic nationalism or the economics. Ethnic nationalism has been defined by security theorists as the ‘clash of the peoples,’ everywhere and in the case of Nigeria it may indeed drive Nigeria’s politics for generations to come. With Nigeria’s troubled past of ethnic clashes I believe ethnic nationalism is the underlying driver due to lack of fair distribution of economic and political resources which seem to roll back the gains made by Nigeria insofar as the democratization process is concerned. So if there is the inability of the Nigerian successive governments (note I use successive governments) to deal fairly with the economic and political interests of ethnic groups this may indeed lead to ethnic regionalism. However, ethnic nationalism has been masked by terrorism. Terrorism first has masked other different ideas such as ethnic nationalism in an era of political and economic struggles in Nigeria. Secondly, it has masked the weakness of state institutions. Thirdly, it also masked the role of Islam in Nigeria which has resulted in Boko Haram challenging the legitimacy of the State.

Militant

Militant

Terrorist attacks are undermining the security and safety of many Nigerians living in the northeastern part of the country. It certainly undermines its democracy, since the government can’t seem to provide security for its citizens. The insecurity in Nigeria is very severe, just like any war zone in other parts of the globe, so says a political risk map by a U.K risk management firm. Nigeria, one of Sub-Saharan Africa’s leading oil producers, is afflicted with an outbreak of political violence, insistent ethnic tensions, and a hazy legal and regulatory condition. Nigeria has suffered a steep deterioration in its political and security environment. The federal government is at war with an Islamist militant insurgency – Boko Haram – in the northern region of the country and terrorist attacks are widespread, undermining the security situation and escalating sectarian divides. Foreign investments often use political risk to assess whether or not to participate in businesses in a country. On a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most risky, Nigeria ranks 5 and many foreigners have been kidnapped and some killed by Islamist militant insurgents. Fighting terrorism in a democracy is not easy, particularly for a country like Nigeria with many ethnic groups and a budding democracy. The government also may still be wary of its army. However, recently the Nigerian government had no choice but to involve the army in this fight by declaring marshal law in three states, where Boko Haram is very active. Although, prevalent corrupt practices and the weak capacity of the Nigerian government to push through reforms to make private-sector activity challenging has considerable impact on the prospects of development in the country. Hence, the country’s capacity to tackle the causes of terrorism in the country is greatly crippled.

There has being an exchange of relations between the Islamist and the security forces that has disrupted security in the region. This has created an environment of fear and uncertainty, changing the realities in the region. The continual exchange by security forces and the Islamist militants has ensured a resurgent insecurity and unsafe environment for residents of the Northern part of Nigeria, particularly Christians who have come under recurring attacks from the Islamist militants. The exchange has led to an intrusion of basic human rights in the region.

Explosions

Explosions

This security dilemma is scarcely exclusive to Nigeria. Many countries are faced with the questions on how to firmly hold onto democratic principles, civil liberties and freedom of movement even as those characteristics of societies make citizens more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Terrorism, which is defined as a “calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature and executed through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear” is a threat that no government has any idea of how to deal with and has tremendous impact on democratic principles. How does a government, any government, tackle the issues of terror within its territory? Providing security to its citizens without embellishing the rights of its citizens. This has been the challenge for many democracies particularly states with fledgling democracies. Nigeria has had several challenges with its political environment to address the threats from the terrorist group, Boko Haram, with little result, due to its vast ethnic divide. Even its military prowess can do little to lessen the dangers those cities in the northern part of Nigeria encounter, which are subject to unpredictable and unpreventable attacks by small nongovernmental actors like Boko Haram.

The Nigerian government has categorized the general insurgency in northern Nigeria as that driven by Boko Haram. Its foundation has been in the northeastern city of Maiduguri, in Borno state. Its leadership is associated with the Kanuri ethnic group, which Abubakar Shekau now leads, after the demise of Mohammed Yusuf at the hands of the Nigerian police. Shekau is the leader who communicates mostly with the aid of videos from an unknown location. Violence connected with his insurrection has been almost entirely directed against agencies of the Nigerian government, especially the police and the military, and Muslims who are seen as having sold out to the current administration. His insurgency has also attacked Christians living in the region. Over the past year, assaults on Christians have also increased, though it is usually unclear what group has actually carried them out. However, the attacks appear to be a war with the Nigerian government and with the fellow Muslims who participate in the present administration. The victims cut across the traditional ethnic divide.

The Nigerian government declared a state of emergency in three state most affected by these terrorist acts and this won enormous support in the political environment. The military has since claimed victory in apprehending several members of the militant group as well as destroying several camps in the region. However, considering the features of the militant group, it’s too early to assume that the region is secure from terrorist attacks, which are skillful at hiding and resurfacing at a later time. There is also concern about human rights abuses in the region for the Nigerian security agency in tackling the insurgency. Many claims are recorded that supports the atrocity of the military to regular citizens residing in the region. Nigeria’s heavy-handed military has escalated the conflict. The Joint Task Force is accused of using indiscriminate violence in retaliated attacks. Amnesty International criticized unlawful arrests, extra-judicial killings and unexplained disappearances. But that has been a major challenge for democracies to tackle terrorism. And Nigeria is no exemption. The Nigerian government is, however, already handling victory to terrorism by sacrificing human rights and the rule of law to fighting terrorism. As these features are essential to democracy everywhere.

Nonetheless, for the Nigerian government to effectively curb terrorists’ acts, it has to address the cause of the terrorist attacks by first dissuading disaffected groups from employing terror acts to achieve their goals. This can be achieved mainly through human development in the region. The Northern Nigeria is the most impoverished region in the country with a 76% poverty rate. The illiteracy level is the highest in the country as well as unemployment rates in the region. In addition, the government has to develop state capacity to prevent and tackle terrorism, which compliments human rights and the rule of law.

Article written by Afis Alao and Denis Bogere.

Related articles
by

Culture the Heart of Africa

When I blogged on the importance of elections a number of you challenged me on that and raised the question of the economics and culture. Setting aside the quality of African democracy, in relationship to elections one ought to consider the political, economic and cultural history of Africa’s dilemma with democratic rule. And as rightfully so questions were raised whether Africa had a viable alternative to democracy and whether Africa needs it, hence where did Africa go wrong.

I look at democracy as encompassing the economics and politics and culture. Democracy is a quintessentially contested issue as it is evident from the responses. How democracy is understood and interpreted is an issue that is up for intense discussion and I will leave it for your own conclusions. To me I see democracy as a culture and culture is a receptor in which different elements or variables such as the form of government people want can be plugged, and that does not mean that the variables will work. Africa’s tragedy as it relates with democracy starts right at its independence from colonial rule.

Present day African States at some point in time were empires, kingdoms and chiefdoms that had their traditional political, economic and social structures that made them independent and autonomous. However on the eve of independence of African countries from their colonizers these traditional structures or institutions were deemed archaic and seen as obstacles to the newly independent nation-states. As a result wrangling between various ethnic groups and allied interests over the fate of the newly independent states in the post colonial order produced various regimes on the continent from Authoritarianism, Military Rule, Neopatrimonialism, and “Big Men” regimes of the likes of Gnassingbe Eyadema – Togo, Idi Amin Dada – Uganda, Jean-Bedel Bokassa – CAR and Mobutu Sese Seko – [Zaire] Congo and the list goes during the 1960’s, 70’s and 80’s and now to illegal electoral democracies and so-called hybrids.

It should be noted that these entities prior to their dismantling had political, economic and social administrative power to govern. They had their own courts, ability to collect tax from their people and deep ethnic cleavages that provided legitimacy for the kings and chiefs to govern. In the new modern state kingships were regulated to cultural figure heads without political, economic and administrative power. After four decades of post colonial governance in Africa as the map below from the Economist indicates most of the African countries are weak nation states.

African Democracy Rating 2011

The implication being that if you’re a kin observer of history it should not take long to realize that culture is and should be part of Africa’s ideological dispensation. Culture is a receptor in which different elements of various political and economic ideologies can germinate and each and every culture has one, although to the eye of a common observer this may not be apparent. Culture accepts or rejects given aspects of political and economic ideologies.

The failure of earlier leaders and yes to a certain extent we; to look at kingdoms or culture as a means of addressing the political, economic challenges of African solely lie on our feet. Basically we started from scratch in building institutions in Africa yet we had kingdoms and due to their long traditions already had a culture that had habits and practices or political culture that current institutions lack.

In the end Tradition and Modernity are not antithetical to each other and we should be ready to use these institutions that the common man identifies with to curve out an African Ideology that at its core meets the developmental needs of the nation-state and must work for working families. Otherwise the experiment of nation-state so far as proven to be a challenge because it hasn’t delivered on its promise. In fact Thabo Mbeki’s Letter on the need for an African Renaissance at its core speaks of an African Ideological dispensation deep rooted in our culture that yes recognizes the progress made in modern times but also looks at how our cultural heritage can be used to spur growth and development and also protect those gains if any.

by

A case for Elections in Africa

Africa’s democratic experience has been argued from various vantage points and regardless of these points of views they can be summed up, categorized and generalized into two schools of thought or as the debate between gradualists and sequencelists. The sequencelists argue that for democracy to emerge in a society there must be a set of certain conditions and experiences that the society identifies itself with. The gradualists, on the other hand argue that democracy can emerge without necessarily having a predetermined set of conditions and experiences that sequencelists assume. So where does that leave Africa in this democratic debate. That democratic debate must be a debate about Pan Africanism and its ability to reconcile competeing elements as liberalism has done to acertain extent. Pan Africanism remains the best vehicle to achieve the unification and real liberation of the continent.

With the coups in Mali, Central African Republic, and Chad one wonders whether Africa with the exception of the above mentioned countries is transitioning from military dictatorship and “the big man syndrome, the days of Mr. President, the big man” to multiparty systems embedded in parliamentarism or presidentialism making it imperative that these systems that support democracy are entrenched. Since independence Africa’s engagement with democratic rule has proved to be a challenge. A continent divided into nation-sates with complete disregard to territorial boundaries of its peoples has its effects still reverberating through now. As that maybe, that is, the hand that Africa has been dealt and we have to deal with it.

mohavvelaty20130416095848610

The first decade of Africa’s experiment with democratic rule was marred in shifts and changes in electoral factions and post-election alliances. These attributes were a common narrative in Africa for example in Uganda during the first elections held in 1962. In which, upon the realization by the UPC (Uganda People’s Congress) that the then P.M would lose the elections to Democratic Party (DP) it formed an alliance with KY (Kabaka Yekka) political party to deny the DP electoral win. Nonetheless the failure of Africa’s initial democratic experience can be attributed to the failure of its leaders. Fast forward and it seems though the current crop of African leaders with the exception of a few still remind some of us Africa’s initial democratic experience. Leaders just offer lip service to the ideals of democratic rule but rarely do they come through.

But how do we get to a democratic Africa, one of the starting places would be and that if we are to accept the premise of Kew (2005) that: “African countries at both ends of this divide appear to have come to a common consensus that the democratic path is the only institutional vehicle that can deliver the socioeconomic progress demanded by populaces across the continent”. If that is the case then Lindberg (2006) posits that “mere repetition of multiparty elections—regardless whether they are free and fair or not—leads to increases in human freedom and the spread of democracy”. Elections have become an essential piece of the global conflict resolution system. They are considered a benchmark in deciding whether a country has consolidated democracy or not. Yet it is also clear that elections are conflict prone and can be generators of conflicts. Lindberg (2006) argues that the more elections the better even when the elections are flawed the country should keep on having them because elections create a culture of expectation and eventually this produces the need for meaningful elections.

kenya-election-pic

Elections also provide the opportunity for the opposition every four or five or six years to compete for the right to govern the country. Lindberg (2006) articulates furthermore that by the fourth election cycle the countries having elections see the loosening up of political space in which civil liberties are fairly respected. Although Lindberg’s take on elections is open to intense debate and scrutiny I’m convinced by Lindberg’s argument that elections must be at the heart of Africa’s democratic path because embedded in democracy is the idea of elections. That is:

Elections by themselves are a fundamental organizing principle of democratic culture in society because elections provide the opportunity after every four or five years where the society exercises its individual rights to weigh in the governance of their country. If after every four or five years the elections are flawed continuously this eats away at the legitimacy of the government in power and eventually the government collapses in one way or shape. Consequently, elections do educate voters on the electoral process and also allows the voters to make informed choices about the nature of government that they want to govern them.

Elections decide who will govern and this decision rests with the people. That is, elections act as a conflict resolution mechanism in that political elites who want to govern have to articulate why they want to govern and that decision is left up to the voters to decide. Elections act as a national decision making mechanism in which the citizenry decides as a country what their form of government ought to be. Elections are a bulwark against illegitimate governments that are conflict prone.

_66249496_pollingreuters

In the end democracy is like a pyramid in which the political, social, and economic factors are prioritized accordingly. The building of strong political institutions, implementation of viable economic reforms, and social organization is a gradual process. Democracy cannot be defined in terms sequencelists but rather in terms of gradualism. That does not mean I agree with the current democratic pretense of most of the African countries that have failed to produce an Ideological dispensation that caters to the political and economic needs of its people. The lack of good governance and leadership in Africa is Africa’s fault it’s that simple. Come to think about God has blessed Africa with resources and good climate yet Africa lags behind, in the early 1960’s most of Africa’s economies case in point Ghana, Uganda and Nigeria were better than China, India and even Bangladesh yet now the opposite is true these countries have surpassed all countries in Africa. In simple terms Africa suffers from a lack an ideological dispensation. Pan Africanism that embodies the economics and politics has been abused by a bunch of reactionaries that have fragmented the African people into gender chauvinism, sectarianism of tribes and religion. Pan Africanism should be a peoples system that promotes values that are the product of the African civilization and struggles against slavery, racism, colonialism, and neo-colonialism. Physical borders imposed on the continent have given way to mental boundaries, which continue to divide the children of Africa on the continent and also in the Diaspora.

by

Recource and Conflict Part II

Diamonds and oil are one example of a long list of African resources that have caused conflict despite international efforts designed to mitigate the impact of resources on conflict. Resource conflict countries such as Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Angola point to a stark truth: the conventional approach to understanding the relationship between resources and conflict is not complete and has gaps to fill. In doing so I started by looking at the Resource Curse Paradigm and I look at the last 2 below. Probably this can shed light on the many causes of conflict within resource rich countries and that no one size fits all in dealing with resource based conflicts.

Resource conflict: posits that conflict emanates from the incompatible claims to the resource in question, that is who has the right to the resource in question. These incompatible claims emanate from various sources such as resource exploitation, compensation, exploration and environmental degradation. Thus, conflict arises from the revenues generated and how these revenues are allocated. The prism of the resource conflict is that the discovery and the excavation of the resource itself can lead to conflict arising from the allocation of revenues (rents) from the resource. That is the inability of governments to deal fairly with the economic and political interests of groups pertaining to the resource in question can increase the likelihood of conflict.

Resource Conflict: Resource Based Causes of Conflict.

Image

Source: Natural resources and conflict in Africa: the tragedy of endowment (Abiodun 2007).

Resource Accessibility: posits that conflict emanates from the opportunity in terms of the revenues the resource provides and how easily accessible the resource is.  In essence, conflict is caused by the outrage and sense of injustice over the fact that the resource is stolen or unfairly appropriated. Conflict emanates where opportunities exist for easy access to the resource in question and the rent-seeking generated from the resource. The core argument of resource accessibility is purely about greed, that is, greed is the primary motivator of the conflict and the conflict may have nothing to do with incompatible claims to the resource in question. Thus, the “lootability” of the resource in question and the opportunity it offers for revenues increases the likelihood of violence. Resource Accessibility has to do with access to the resources and the opportunity the resources provide for revenues and thus attracting various interest groups.

Resource Accessibility: Resource Based Causes of Conflicts

Image

Source: Natural resources and conflict in Africa: the tragedy of endowment (Abiodun 2007).

Resource Curse, Resource conflict and Resource Accessibility and the several empirical and systematic studies done on resources and conflict bring out the complexities between conflict and valuable mineral resources such as diamonds and oil. In some cases, the connection between resources and conflict works through the resource curse in which natural resource abundance impedes economic development and leads to conflict. In other cases the connection between resources and conflict works through resource conflict and can be seen when groups within a state challenge the ownership claim of the central government over the valuable resource in question. In other cases the connection between resources and conflict works through resource accessibility in which groups take the opportunity for personal enrichment. This to me is the basis by which resources and conflict should be understood and addressed.