Magufulification: Concept That Will Define Africa's Future and the Man Who Makes Things Happen

Magufulification: Concept That Will Define Africa's Future and the Man Who Makes Things Happen

Wednesday, 30 September 2020

TOWARDS THE 2020 GENERAL ELECTION : THE PARADOX OF CANDIDATES BEING ELECTED UNOPPOSED.


       


 Our   country’s  election   laws,  Act  (no. 1  of  1985)  and  the  Local  Authorities (Elections) Act  (no.  4  of  1979);  provide    that  where,  upon  the  designated  closing  time,  there  is  only  one  candidate  who  has  returned  the  requisite  ‘nomination  forms’  to  the  Returning  Officer,   and  if  no  objection  is  raised  against  such  candidate  within  a  period  of  twenty  four  hours  thereafter,  such   candidate  shall  be  declared   by  the  relevant  Returning  Officer  to  have  been  “elected  unopposed”.                                                                                                           
This  has  been  a  familiar  occurrence   in  our  electoral  history,  both   of  general  elections  as  well  as     of  bye-elections  at  the  Parliamentary  and  Local  Authorities  level;   when   CCM  candidates  in  a  number  of  constituencies    and  Wards  were   declared  by  their  respective  Returning  Officers  as  having  been  elected  unopposed.    This   has  also  featured  prominently  in   this  year’s   forthcoming  October  parliamentary  and  Local  Authority  elections    in  which,   immediately  after   the closing  hour   on  nomination   day,   25th  August,  2020;  information  was   widely  circulated  in  the  social  media  platforms,    to  the  effect  that  CCM  had obtained  a  windfall   of   18  parliamentary  seats  in  constituencies  in  which  its  candidates  had  been  elected  unopposed;   plus   some   450  Local  Council   members,   who  had  also  been  elected  unopposed  in  their  respective  Wards.                                                                                                
 This  was   before  the   objections  to  the  said  nominations   had  been  raised,  and  determined   by  the  National   Electoral  Commission.   But   even   after    all  the  objections  had  been  dealt  with   and  finally  determined;    !8   CCM  candidates  were  confirmed    by  the  Commission  as  having  been  validly  elected  unopposed;  plus  two  others,   who   also  became  unopposed  as  a  result  of  their  Opposition  contestants’  voluntary  withdrawal  from  the  race.        
However,   the  basic  concern   of  this  article  is  not  about   the   numbers  of  unopposed  candidates.   It   is   all   about   the   ‘ingenious’   paradox,   that   is   involved   in  such   unopposed   election  outcomes.  
The  Oxford  English  Dictionary  defines  the  word  “paradox”  as  “a  situation  that  has  two  opposite  features,  and  therefore  seems  strange”.   In  relation  to  the  phenomenon    of  ‘candidates  being  elected  unopposed’,  the  paradox  arises  because,    on  the  one  hand,   such  outcomes  have  the  positive  feature  of  satisfying  the  requirements  of  the  electoral   laws  cited  above.  But  on  the  other   hand,  they  also  have  the  negative  feature  of  disenfranchising  the  electorate  in  the  affected   constituencies.  This  is  clearly  bad,  because  it  creates  a  serious  ‘democracy  deficit’  on  our  democracy  landscape.             
  The   principal  purpose  of  this  article,  is  to  draw  attention  to  this  ingenious   paradox.
The   Paradox  of  unopposed  election  candidates.   
This   paradox  was  first  identified  by  Mwalimu  Julius  Nyerere,   who    then  took   what  were  considered  to  be  the  most  appropriate  corrective  measures,   in  the  prevailing  circumstances  at  the  material  time.                                                 
The  month  of  October  of  every  year,   is  normally our  “ month  of  remembrance”   of   Nyerere’s    death  on  14th  October,  1999;  This  being  the  month  of  October,  2020;   I  will  take  this  opportunity,   for  the  benefit  of  our  younger  generation,  to    make  a  presentation  on    Mwalimu  Nyerere’s   leadership   endeavours   in  this  regard  during  his  lifetime;    as  a  way  of  paying   continuing  respect  to  our  departed  father  of  the  nation.   For,   although  Nyerere  is  gone,  his  ideals  must  be  kept  alive,   so  that  they  may  continue  to  inspire  our  nation.    Indeed,  as  that  Scottish  historian  Thomas  Carlyle  (1795 – 1881)  said  in  his  book  titled   “Heroes  and  Hero-worship” :  “No  great  man  lives  in  vain.  The  history  of  the  world  is  but  the  biography  of  great  men”.   Undoubtedly,   Mwalimu  Nyerere  was  one  such  great  man,  and  this  narrative  should   preferably  form  part  of  his  biography.                                                                                                             
For  Mwalimu  Nyerere,   the  matter  of  candidates  ‘ being  elected  unopposed’   was  a  serious  issue  of  disenfranchising  the  voters;    as will  be   narrated  in  the  paragraphs  that  follow  here  below.
An  ingenious  paradox.
The  idea  of candidates  being  declared  to  have  been  ‘elected  unopposed’  was  an  invention  of  the   
legal   pundits  of  colonial  times.   Because  it  surfaced   even   during  the  first  two   pre-independence parliamentary  elections  which  were  held  under  the  supervision  of   the   British  colonial  Administration   in  Tanganyika  in  1958/59  and  1960;  when  many  of  the  TANU  sponsored  candidates  were  declared  to  have  been  elected  unopposed,  in  the  face  of  stiff  competition  under  the  obnoxious   ‘tripartite  voting  system’.     For  the  1958/59  parliamentary  election,   a  total  of  ten  constituencies  had  been  created  by  the  British  Administration,  for  which   the   Authority  had  decided  to  hold   in  two  separate  phases,  with   five  constituencies  holding  their   election  in  September  1958,  and  the  remaining  five  in  February   1959.  The  reason  given  for  this  arrangement  was  that  these  elections  could  not  be  held  throughout  the  country  at  the  same  time,  because  “ it  was  too  great  an  administrative  undertaking”.  (compare   this   with  the  first  post-independence  general  election  of  1965,  which  was  easily  held  throughout  the  country  in  all  the  107  constituencies  on  the  same  day).    In  both   phases,   most  of  the  TANU  sponsored  candidates  were  elected  unopposed,  despite   the   stiff   competition  from  two  other  participating  political  parties :  the  United  Tanganyika  Party (UTP)   and  the  African  National  Congress (ANC).  
The  scenario  of  TANU  sponsored  candidates  being  ‘elected  unopposed’  was  repeated  in  the  1960  pre-independence  parliamentary  election;  in  which  as  many  as  58  TANU  sponsored  candidates ,  out  of  a  total  of   71  constituencies,   were  declared  to  have  been  elected  unopposed.                          
 This  was,  of  course,  very  good  news  for  TANU,  for  it  saved  the  party  a  great  deal  of  valuable  time,  as  well  as  resources,   which  would  have  been  spent  on  campaigning  and   mobilizing  votes  for  its  candidates.    And,  for  the  same  reasons,  it  was   similarly  good  news  for  the  candidates  themselves;  and  for  the  Government;   which  also  saved  money  which  would  have  been  spent  on  organizing  and  managing  the  entire  election  process.                                                  
 However,     Mwallimu    Nyerere  the  democrat,   felt  that  these   outcomes  were  bad  for  democracy;  and   decided  that,  after  independence   such   system  must  be  changed,   in  order  to  do   away  with  this   undemocratic  disenfranchisement  of  the   electorate   which,   he   strongly   felt,   was  creating  a   serious   deficit  in  the  country’s   democratic  dispensation.  
According  to  Mwalimu  Nyerere’s   own  statements,   it  was   abundantly  clear  to   him,  and   indeed   to   many  other  political  observers,   that  this  particular  situation  was  created  by  TANU’s    massive  popularity   and    unchallenged  support,   among  the  people  of  Tanganyika;   plus  Nyerere’s     own   personal  charisma,  and  his   general  political   appeal  to  the people.                              
 This   latter  aspect  became   clearly  manifested  during  Tanganyika’s  first  Presidential  election  which  was  held  in  November  1962,  in  preparation  for  the  country  change  from  its  then   (British)   Dominion  status,  to  a  Republic.    That  election  had  two  participants:  Mwalimu  Julius  Nyerere  sponsored  by   the  Tanganyika  African  National  Union  (TANU);    and  Zuberi   Mtemvu,  who  was  sponsored  by  the  African  National  Congress (ANC).    Mwalimu   Nyerere’s   election    victory  was   far  in  excess  of  95%. 
Nyerere’s  solution :  the  introduction  of  a  single-party  system
We  stated   earlier,   that  the  negative  effect  of  candidates  being  ‘elected  unopposed’   was  the  disenfranchisement  of  the  voters    in  the  affected   constituencies.    This  defect  was  distinctly   noticeable  because   the  pre-independence  general  elections  were  confined  only  to  Parliamentary  elections.   This  was   vastly    different  from   the  current  practice;  wherein   a  general  election  consists  of  three  distinct  elections,  namely    of   the   President,  of  the  members  of  Parliament,   and  of  the   members  of  the  Local  Authority  Councils.   Thus,  in  today’s  circumstances,    It  is  practically  impossible   that  all  three  aspirants  will  be  elected  unopposed  in   any   given  constituency .   Thus,   where  an  aspirant  for  membership  of  Parliament   is  unopposed,  voting   will  still  take  place  for  the  other  positions.   Consequently,   the   question   of   ‘disenfranchising   the  voters’,   does  not  arise.   It  should   not  be   a  matter  of    surprise  therefore,   that  in  those  circumstances,    it   became   a  major  issue  of   concern  for  Mwalimu  Nyerere;   for  the  reason  only  that   it  denied   the  people  concerned,  their  democratic  right  of  selecting  their  leaders  through  the  ballot  box.        
It  is   primarily   for  that  reason,   that   Mwalimu  Nyerere    considered  it  necessary  to  find  a  solution.   It  should  be  remembered  that  at  that  time,   Tanganyika  had  a  multi-party  Constitution.   Thus,  as  a   result  of  the  1960  pre-independence  general  election,   with  TANU  having  won   70  out  of  the  71   seats   available   in  the  Legislative  Council;   the  country   had  been  turned  into  a  de  facto   one-party   state.  The  worrying  factor for  President  Nyerere,  was  the  fact  that  the  voters  in  58  of  those  71  constituencies,   had  been  disenfranchised;   because  their  MPs  had  been  elected  unopposed.                                                 
It  was  this  latter  fact,   that   led  President    Nyerere   to  the  conclusion  that   democracy  would  be  better   served,   if  the  people  were  allowed  to  choose  from  several  competing   TANU   candidates.   He  said  thus:    “ We  have  to  dispense  with  the  disciplines   of  this   multi-party  system.   I  would  say  that  such  disciplines  are  not  only  unnecessary  in  our  prevailing  circumstances,  but  that  they  are  bound,  in  time,  to  prove  fatal  our  democracy”.                          
 Hence,   having  reached  that  conclusion,  he  then  set  out  to  establish   the   mechanism  for  achieving  that  particular  objective.
The   appointment   of   the  ‘One-party’   Commission.
President  Nyerere  was  sworn  into  office  on  9th  December,  1962,  the  first  anniversary  of  the  country’s  independence.   And   very  soon  thereafter,  in  January  1963,  the  TANU  National  Executive  Committee,   under   Nyerere’s   chairmanship,    passed  a  special  resolution  recommending  the  introduction  of  a  ‘single-party’   system  of  government.                                                                                    In  implementation  of  that  resolution,    President  Nyerere   soon  appointed   the  Commission,  which  was  placed  under  the  chairmanship  of  Vice-President  Rashid  Kawawa.   The  Commission  worked  diligently  until   22nd  March,  1965,  when  it  presented  its  Report  to  President  Nyerere;  who  then  submitted  it  to  Party’s   National  Executive  Committee  for  consideration,  after  which  it  went  through  the  normal  legislative  process.    Ultimately,  the  One-Party  Constitution  was  enacted  on  8th  July,  and  became  effective  from  10th  July,  1965. 
President  Nyerere  was  determined,  that  the  envisaged  one-party  Constitution  must  create  a  properly   functioning,  democratic  State.  Thus,  when  he  appointed  the  Commission  which  was  tasked  to  prepare  the  proposals  for  this  Constitution,  he  also  issued   certain  specific  directives  and  guidelines  regarding  the  principles  of  democracy,    which  that  Commission  was  required  to  incorporate  in  its  proposals.    This  was  successfully   accomplished,  as  evidenced  in  the  PREAMBLE  to  that  Constitution,  which   read  as  follows:-  
“WHEREAS   freedom,   justice,  fraternity  and  concord,  are  founded  upon  the  recognition  of  the  equality  of  all  men,    and  of  their  inherent  dignity;  and  upon the  recognition  of  their  rights    to  protection  of  life,  liberty  and  property;   to  freedom  of  conscience,   expression,  and   association;  their  rights  to  participate  in  their  own  Government,  and  to  receive  a  just  return  for  their  labour;   AND  that  when  men  are  united  together  in  a  community,  it  is  their  duty  to  respect  the  rights   and  dignity  of  their  fellow  men;  to  uphold  the  laws  of  the  State,  and  to  conduct  the  affairs   of  State   in  such  a  way  that  its  resources  are  preserved,   developed  and  enjoyed  for  the  benefit  of  all  its  citizens,  and   to  prevent the  exploitation  of  one  man by  another; AND  WHEREAS   Such  rights  are  best  preserved  and  protected;  and  such  duties  ar  most  equitably  disposed  in  a  democratic  society  where  the  Government  is  responsible  to  a  freely  elected  Parliament  representing   all   the  people;   and  where  the  courts  of  law  are  free  and  impartial;    NOW  THEREFORE  this  Constitution,  which  makes  provision  for  the  Government  of  Tanzania  as  such  a  democratic  society,  is  hereby  enacted  by  the  Parliament  of  the  United  Republic  of  Tanzania”. This   is  an  important   part  of  our  political  history. (will  continue  next  week)
piomsekwa@gmail.com   /   0754767576.


UhuRuto Yin and Yang That Became Like Chalk and Cheese


            I must honestly declare my interests. I’m not Kenyan but Tanzanian though Kenya’s my second home.  After all, I’m one bin-Adam who despise colonial imposed borders on Africans who are supposed to be nothing but Africans in their continent of Africa like the Aussie are. Therefore, what I’m to posit here’s purely out of professional lenses but not political affiliation thanks to its sensitivity. I’m not seeking audacity to establish or have theodicy or deific interpolation amidst the confusion the situation in Kenya asks for and causes all resulting from the schemes for 2022 presidential ambitions. You can call the presidency the evil that’s hunting and haunting Kenya as far as tribal configurations are concerned. There’s a confusion, especially in the country muddied by tribal politics, dangers, interests, and sentiments. To insightfully begin with, I invoke the wisdom of the sage that says that you can choose a friend but not a neighbour. You can divorce a spouse but not a neighbour. Therefore, as a Tanzanian, there’s no way I can avert to be touched upon with what’s ongoing in my neighbours’ houses. By the virtue of neighbourhood and professionalism, I’ve the right to address the matter in point as noted in the heading.

Hopefully, many still remember how president Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and his deputy president William Kipchirchir Samoei arap Ruto became what’s later known as UhuRuto; after the duo shocked the world by pulling a surprise that’s never been seen anywhere as accused persons who were able to get into power and thereafter acquitted of the heinous offences charged with. Knowing the danger that the duo’s facing–––despite being members of incompatible flanks–––they beat the odds and came together to fight the case and for the power by exploiting the sympathy they enjoyed from their tribal cocoons that catapulted them to power surprisingly. After getting in office, momentarily the duo became twins or yin and yang whose bromance their enemies begrudged. Their faces were always packed with beams, camaraderie and power becoming a joint biz. Nevertheless, as Uhuru steadied himself in power, those who underestimated him­­­­–––calling him kamwana or the boy–––started to evidence changes to maturing quickly and asserting his authority.

Despite enjoying a short time bliss, after securing and safeguarding power and being acquitted of the case and the danger that brought two nemeses together, nature took its toll on the twosome. Everybody started to secretly plot how to extricate himself from the clasp of another. Uhuru sought to enjoy his power alone as president without necessarily sharing it with his deputy. The tango they’re in asked for everybody to go solo. Similarly, Ruto started to plan to keep his clench on power using Uhuru to succeed him after finishing his constitutional two terms in office in 2022. To do so, Ruto had to prove that he’s the force to be reckoned with either as a co-owner of power or a kingmaker seeking to be made king by the one he made one. He wanted to show that the presidency was a shared biz between the twosome under a 50/50% basis, as per Johana Ng’eno (MP), one of Ruto’s sidekicks. He started making statement that no VP had ever made; and started to see himself more dissimilar and superior than other former vice presidents. For, he’s not a VP but a DP who’s on the ballot with Uhuru whereas no VP’s ever been the ballot in the history of Kenya.

 Again, why did Uhuru and Ruto behave the way they did? As for Uhuru, firstly knew he no longer needed Ruto granted there’s no office in the land that he’d aspire for as former president. secondly, Uhuru knows how ambitious Ruto’s; and the way he ganged up with him not because of love or trust but to use him as a conduit to power and safety. Thirdly, Uhuru’s inner circle that, apart from knowing Ruto, suspected he’d crucify them had he succeeded to use their man to get to power.

As for Ruto, firstly, he knows that the case that brought the duo together is long gone.  Secondly, he knew that Uhuru won’t have become president without his support, and he wouldn’t have become DP without using Uhuru whose name and networks provided sure wherewithal to power. However, if the two are compared, Ruto benefited more from Uhuru than the latter did from the former.  More importantly, looking at this untoward equation, who needs whom, when, how; and, by extension why, after seven years in office? Banking on their communities, the duo stole thunder after living two different lives as they stalked each other. Again, they both share a nexus in that they’re all indicted by the ICC. Similarly, they’re cloned by KANU whose dirty long-ago they can’t escape shall we probe them microscopically. So, too, they’re all acquitted after the Kenyan government of the time under Mwai Kibaki refused to cooperate with the ICC. All these are but history that can’t bind the two together anymore.

            Importantly, the duo’s unified by the then looming ICC’s menace, which, in the end, turned out to be a blessing in lieu of a curse that’s surfacing now.  Because of this menace, the duo ganged up together to run for presidency in order to defeat the end of justice. They successfully and shrewdly did. After psyching and finding that the president of Kenya and his deputy enjoy immunity, the duo sought to get the job that’d saved from the wrath of the ICC, which it did by forcing Kibaki regime to work with and for them. Because of the probabilities to win, the government that they’re seeking to take over from got the message and supported them for two reasons. Firstly, by then, the duo’s a better enemy than the opposition led by Raila Odinga. Secondly, Uhuru’s the member of the outgoing government. Thus, he’s a winning horse for the outgoing government. It came to pass that the duo played their cards nicely so as to get backing from the Kibaki government. Scratch my back; I’ll scratch yours. Verily, after landing in power, the duo saw to it that Kibaki’s dirty linens­­­–––among which are the Anglo-leasing mega scandal and others–––weren’t put on the agora for every eye to see and laugh. This is an African way. The hyena that knows you eats you with mercy. Swahili sage’s it that the ghost that knows you does can’t eat you until it finishes you. More importantly, if you climb up a tree, you must climb down the same tree. This is what Ruto didn’t understand and accept.

            Currently, the reality’s that the same communities that propelled the duo to power must forget to do it again in 2022 precisely when Uhuru retires.  By the look of things, Uhuru won’t back Ruto as his once promised quid pro quo.  Ruto made a mistake to believe that the communities that delivered them victory are static or UhuRuto’s private estate. Things do change; and they change dramatically. Who knows that Ruto will still have the same appeal to his community let alone Kenya? Who knows if the coming general elections will bring a surprise to the duo? Who knows that the sympathy people had, thanks to the ICC’s indictment, will still be there while the ICC case was terminated many years ago? Similarly, the cant that Uhuru must back Ruto can’t help Kenya. For, politics isn’t about a love story. It’s about interests for both voters and those they vote for. By the way, ICC case is gone. Is there any reason[s] that the two communities will vote for Ruto? African sage’s it that don’t set sail on someone else’s star.

            In sum, to prove that things bichenjanga as Mudavadi would put it, namely­­­–––things do change­­–––Uhuru’s already said categorically that he’s working for his legacy. To succeed in doing so, he decided to embark on the handshake with his former foe-turned friend, Raila Odinga who seems to steal thunder. To prove that this move, Ruto is no longer in the equation in succession politics. He wasn’t consulted or invited during the handshake that’s shaken his marriage with Uhuru. As the things seem, the bromance between Raila and Uhuru’s inexorable and more of the UhuRaila replacing UhuRuto. Those who want to assess and thereafter gauge what’ll transpire, must consider how the Building Bridges Initiatives–––which’s Uhuru’s and Raila’s hobbyhorse–––is doing currently. Indeed, Uhuru and Ruto aka UhuRuto’s nothing but the yin and yang that have become like chalk and cheese. What we see now, I can boldly predict; is nothing but the beginning of the end of the entire UhuRuto project, if I may use the term.

Source: African Executive Magazine today.

Tuesday, 29 September 2020

US PRESIDENTIAL FIRST DEBATE, ONCE AGAIN, TRUMP PROVES HOW UNFIT HE IS

Anybody who watched US presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump can testify to how low and minimally Trump performed. He was outfoxed and out gunned so to speak. He didn't even respect his promise of not interjecting his opponent. His arguments were mostly based on hearsay and lies. He seemed to not have been prepared or stick to script. He proved to be ignorant almost about everything the moderator asked them. His answers were not only shoddy but also shallow and unintelligible. It was more of gobbledegook sort of stuff if not mumbo-jumbo. It was a shame and sham of its kind for Trump side while Biden maintain the tempo and gained oomph as the clock ticked. Will the Americans make another goof to entrust the highest office in land to a person who knows nothing but fabricating and lying? Time will tell.
 

Sunday, 27 September 2020

Je watanzania watachagua kwa huruma au hekima?

Kabla ya kuzama kwenye mada, lazima niseme wazi. Natabiri kuwa watanzania watachagua sera na si sura; uzoefu na si uanagezi; uhalisia na si hekaya za Abunwas; ustaarabu na si matusi; ukweli, si uongo, uhalisia, si uchochezi na matendo na si nadharia.  Kwani urais si nafasi ya majaribio wala tambo bali serious business kwa kisambaa. Mnajua ninachomaanisha hata kama naongea kilevi. Kwa taarifa yenu, walevi wengi ni wasomi na watu wasio wanafiki. Ukimkosea mlevi, kabla hajawa mbwi, atakugwaya. Akishaweka vitu vyake, jiandae kufurumushiwa ukweli unaouma na kuchukisa kinoma. Hivyo, nisemayo leo, ni matokeo ya kanywaji. Waliozoea vitu vilivyotulia na kwenda shule, leo watanshangaa wakidhani sina akili nzuri wasijue mie ni bonge la daktari tena wa falsafa zote. KTY, hakuna watu wakatili kwenye kutovumilia ghilba kama walevi. Ukitaka kumdanganya mlevi, mnyime kanywaji. Ukitaka ukweliwengi wanaokuficha, mpe mlevi kanywaji.
        Nizame kwenye mada sasa. Yupo mzee mmoja mwalimu wa zamani wa chuo; amekuwa akijinadi kwenye mitandao kuwa ni mchambuzi wa masuala ya kibinadamu na kijamii. Mzee huyu ambaye sitamtaja ili nisimpe ujiko wa bure, amekuwa akisema kuwa uchaguzi huu unaweza kuwa wa aina yake kwa vile wapiga kura watapiga kura kwa huruma badala ya hekima. Nakubaliana naye kuwa uchaguzi huu ni wa aina yake kwa vile umejaa wabangaizaji hata wachochezi wanaojua kuwa watapoteza lakini watapata kiki. 
        Pili, mchambuzi huyu anayetumia uchambuzi kuficha mafungamano na ukereketwa wake wa kisiasa, anatia shaka.  Mfano, anatumia uzoefu wa Nelson Mandela, rais wa kwanza mzalendo wa Bondeni alivyochaguliwa kwa vile alikuwa amefungwa na serikali ya kikaburu kwa jumla ya miaka 27. Anashindwa kuelewa kuwa serikali ya kikaburu ilikuwa haramu tofauti na serikali iliyomaliza muda wake. Anashindwa kuelewa kuwa mateso yatokanayo na kupigania umma ni tofauti na yale yatokanayo na kupigania haki binafsi. Mandela alipigania uhuru. Je hawa jamaa zake wenye ugonjwa uitwao Ukosefu wa Sera, Adabu, Heshima na Adili (USAHA) anasahau kuwa siasa za Afrika Kusini na za kipindi kile ni tofauti na za sasa za Bongo ambapo lazima utumia bongo na si bango, sera na si sura, matokeo halisi na si matarajio.
        Tatu, kwa kuzingatia kile watanzania karibu wote wanahitaji–––wakiwamo hata hawa wanaopiga kelele na kukufuru–––sina shaka. Watachagua rais wao; si kwa kusikiliza ngonjera na vilio bali ukweli mtupu utokanao na mambo yanayoweza kutolewa ushahidi na si vinginevyo. Wataangalia utendaji wenye mashiko na si kudandia mambo yasiyoingia hata kwenye kichwa kidogo cha kuku. Katika yote, maendeleo yatachukua kiti cha mbele kwenye vipaumbele ambayo watanzania wanavyo. Afya, amani, barabara, elimu, miundombinu, nishati, na usalama vitakuwa ni tunu wanazotaka anayetaka kuwaongoza awe na uwezo wa kuwahakikishia ima kutokana dira na ilani yake au mambo ambayo ameishayafanya. Hawatakubali kugeuzwa mabunga wala sehemu ya siasa za majaribio. Huu ni ukweli ambao unaweza kuuapia hata bila kupata kanywaji. We are now going practical as opposed to theoretical. Kwa wasiojua kisukuma, nisameheni. Sina haja ya kutafsiri. Kwa kimakonde ni kwamba sasa tunaangalia vitendo na si ngonjera na mashairi. Kwa kijita ni chikerebe, cha kwa akina Pius Msekwa, ni kwamba kapira bwacha sugu si salamu bali kanuni ya sayansi.
        Amini usiamini. Watanzania wa sasa si wa jana. Wanataka mambo yanayowekana na si hadithi za Paukwa Pakawa. Siasa siyo hadithi ya mapenzi. Ni uwanja ya maslahi tena mapana na mengi. Ukitekeleza nilichokutuma na ulichoahidi, nani akuondoe? waliokuwa wakitaka maji wakayapata watamchagua aliyewezesha; kadhalika kwa barabara, umeme na mengine. Waliochukia ufisadi watachagua aliyeuangamiza; ukwepaji kodi na wizi wa raslimali zao watachagua aliyekomesha kadhia hii. Je huyu ni nani? Si kazi yangu kutamka. Msiseme amenihonga kanywaji. Mwenye macho haambiwi tazama; mwenye masikio sikia. Kila kitu kiko wazi kama usiku na mchana. Nani ni usiku na nani mchana? Usiku ni kiza kitupu. Hujui wala kuona uelekeako zaidi ya kelele za wadudu na vyura. Mchana, kila kitu kiko wazi. Hata ukifumba macho utaona tu.
        Ikifika siku ya uchaguzi, chagua uwezekano na si matarajio na ahadi za urongo zisizo na rekodi yoyote ya utendaji. Chagua maendeleo na si maneno matupu. Kwani maneno matupu yanaliwa? Narudia. Mwenye mato haambwi tazama; na mwenye maninga haambwi tazama. See you.
        Tumalize, japo ni haki kuwa mawazo na ushawishi wake, mhusika katika kutetea chama chake, kwa wanaojua maana ya kufaa katika kutumikia watu, wapiga kura huangalia mambo mengi na si kumuonea huruma mgombea ima kwa vile alifungwa au alinusurika kuliwa na simba au kufa ajalini na mambo mengine kama haya. Wapiga kura si mama au baba huruma.
Chanzo: Nipashe Jumapili leo.


Saturday, 26 September 2020

MOMBASA MMELIPIA KUTUMIA MUZIKI HUU?


 

DEMONSTRATIONS IN EGYPT, IS IT THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF aL SISI?

 

Ongoing mass action against Egyptian dictatorial regime is nothing to ignore or gainsay. Egypt has the history of mass actions that  just over nine years ago saw a long time dictator, Hosni Mubarak being pulled down on 11/2/11 after lording it over Egyptians for about 30 years. Thereafter, a democratic government was elected led by the late Mohamed Morsi whom the Mubarak elements led by current dictator Abdul Fattah al Sisi. Morsi made a grave mistake trusting al Sisi with the position of Chief of Defence Forces replacing Mubarak-era  Field Marshall Mohamed Hussein Tantawi. Sisi didn't take long to overthrow his boss. Actually, what transpired in Egypt is similar to what transpired in Congo when the late Patrice Lumumba trusted Joseph Desire Mobutu who ended up conspiring and overthrowing him. In a nutshell, is what is ongoing in Egypt the beginning of the end of Sisi? Time will soon tell.

Friday, 25 September 2020

CONGRATS MR MAGAWA, LANDMINE DETECTING RAT

The rat above recently received an international recognition for its skill of detecting and detonating bombs. This Tanzanian rat–––however is not aware of its accolades–––is exceptional when it comes to do its job. To know more about this heroic creature, please CLICK HERE.

Thursday, 24 September 2020

TOWARDS THE 2020 GENERAL ELECTIONS :“ETHICS IS THE HEART OF LEADERSHIP”.

            As  the  October  general  elections  draw  closer,   the  election  campaigns  by  the  participating  political  parties   are,  correspondingly,  also   gathering  momentum.   The  Presidential  candidates  in  particular,  are  busy   all  over     the  country,   wooing    voters   with  a  dazzling  array  of  promises.              A  total  of  15  candidates  will  be  on  the  Union  Presidential  ballot  paper  for  the  October  28th    general   elections. 
        As   expected,   the   incumbent   President   and  CCM  candidate,  Dr.  John  Pombe   Magufuli   who   is  seeking  re-election  for  his  second  and  final  term;   is   proudly  basing  his  campaign  mainly  on  his  sterling,   outstanding   performance  during  his  first  term  in  office,  drawing  attention  particularly  to   the   massive  investments  he  has   successfully  made  in  various   physical   infrastructures   in  the  construction  of  new  roads  and  bridges,   the  construction  of   historic  mega projects  like  the  Standard  Gauge  Railway,  and  the   new   grand  Nyerere  hydropower  generation  project;    plus  other   investments  in  the  vastly   increased   water  and   health   infrastructure  and  services,   the  purchase  of  a  large  number  of  new  aircraft  for  the  national  airline,  the   vastly  increased  rural  electricity  connection,  the  provision  of  free  Primary  and  junior  Secondary  education  (and  its  associated    investment   in  the  rapid   expansion  of  the   related  school infrastructures);   the   industrialization  of  the  country,  and   fine  tuning   the  economy,  among   many  others;   and  thereafter   asking  the  voters  to   just  allow  him  to  serve  another  term,   so  that  he  can  complete  the   on-going,  unfinished   jobs  and  projects.   
            And  on   their  part,  the  Opposition  parties’  candidates  are  also  making  their  firm  promises  to  the  voters,  as  generously  reported  in  the  mass  media  on  a  daily  basis.   All   of  this   is,  of  course,   very  well ,  and   highly  commendable.    Because  that  is   precisely  what  people  normally  expect  to  hear   from  the  aspiring  election  candidates.                                                                                                          However,   in  this  article,  I  have  set  out   to  address  another  matter   which  I  consider  to  be   of  equally   crucial  importance  to  the  voters,   while  exercising    their    democratic  right   of  choosing  their   leaders  at  the  time  of  elections.   This   is   the   all  important  matter  of   ETHICS,   that  I  wish  to  address   in   today’s  article.  
“Ethics   is  the  heart  of  leadership”
           In   all  general  elections,  but  particularly  so  in  the  Presidential  elections,  voters   normally  seek  to  elect   a   “good  leader ”.   In  the  light  of  that,   I  wish,   respectfully,    to   submit   that   “ethics”   is   the  sine  qua  non  of   ‘    good  leadership’.    Consequently,   during  this  period  of   the   ‘build  up’   to  this  year’s  October  Presidential   election,   I  consider  it   not  only  useful,  but  also   helpful  to  the  voters,   for  me  to   make  a  little  contribution  towards    the  enhancement  of   the  voters’   knowledge  and  understanding   of  this   crucial  matter   by  providing  a  little  more  elaboration,  especially  regarding  the  meaning  of  the   “ethics”  concept  itself,   plus   its   value  and  significance,    in  order   to  enable  them    to  give   sufficient,   and  appropriate   weight,   to  the  possession   of    the  requisite  “leadership  ethics”   as  an  exceedingly   vital  qualification  for    the  Presidential   candidate  who  deserves   to  be  elected. 
Elaboration :  defining   the   word  “ethics”.
         The  Oxford  Advanced  Learner’s  Dictionary  defines  the  word  “ethics”  as  follows:   “Ethics  is  a  system  of  moral  principles,  or  rules  of  behavior,  that  influence  a  parson’s  behavior”.                         
           Other  books  of   authority  on  this  subject,   describe  “ethics”  as  “what  defines  right  from  wrong,  or  good  from  evil,  in  relation  to   the  actions,  volitions,  and  character  traits  of  human  beings”;  and   further  that  “ethics  is  all  pervasive .  .  .   It  is  the  defining  factor  in  the  life  of  an  individual,  as  well  as  in  his  relationship  with  other  persons   who  may  be  affected  by  his  actions,  or  decisions”.
            These  definitions   are  very  helpful   in  enabling  the  voters   to  have   a  clearer  understanding,  and  presumably  a  better  appreciation,  of  the  positive  impact  that  is  being  created  in  our  Society  by  President  Magufuli’s   refreshing  efforts  in  transforming  the   “ethics”,  or  the moral  behavior,  of  our  public  officials  through   the   steps  he  has  been  taking  during  his  first  term  in  office,   by   firmly  and    promptly  fighting   impunity,  and  moral   laxity,  amongst  that  influential  group  of  public  officials.  
          President   Magufuli’s   performance   in  relation  to  ethics.
As  early  as  April  and  May,  2016,  when  President  John  Pombe  Magufuli  had  been  in  office  for  only   about    six  months,   his  ‘refreshing’   ethics  stance  had  already  earned  him  plenty  of  goodwill,   even    beyond  Tanzania’s  borders.    This  was  evidenced  by  the  speech  delivered   by   President  Kagame  of  Rwanda,  when  he  was  welcoming  his  guest,  President  John  Pombe  Magufuli,  on  the  occasion  of   President  Magufuli’s    official  visit  to  Rwanda,  in  April,  2016,  in  which    President   Paul  Kagame  said  the  following :-   “Your   presence   on  the  leadership  scene    has  been  totally  refreshing.  Your  words  and  deeds  also   reflect  our  vision;  and  in  particular,  your  robust  stance  against  corruption,  is  particularly  refreshing”.
        Similar  remarks  were  made  and  reported  in  THE  CITIZEN  newspaper  of   2nd  May  2016,  by  two  foreign  Diplomatic  envoys  based  in  Dar  es  Salaam;   who  had  said  this:  “Since  assuming  office  in  November  last  year,    President   Magufuli  has  been   taking  robust  steps  to  address  graft.   He  has  already  suspended  a  number  of  senior  officials  over  corruption  and  misuse  of  public  funds,  in  his  determined  crusade  to  address  corruption”.
In  actual fact,  by  that  time  President  Magufuli   had  already  identified  himself  with  three  specific            “ethics – related”  areas   to  which  he  had  given  top  priority.   These  were:   (i)  cutting  unnecessary  and  wasteful  public  expenditure;  (ii)   fighting  impunity  in  the  public  Service;  and  (iii)  effectively  tackling  corruption,  which  had  long  plagued  our  nation.                                                                                       These  were  the  three  most  prominent  areas  in  which  a   serious  lack  of  the  requisite  ‘leadership  ethics’   had  been  demonstrated   among   some  of   our  leaders.     President  Magufuli’s  ‘ robust’   actions    greatly  helped  to  draw  public  attention  to  the  extraordinary  extent   to  which  these  maladies  had  penetrated  our  entire   governance  system;  and  thereby   created  the  necessary   awareness   needed    for  everyone  to  fully  support  these  robust  steps,  in  order  to  ensure  that  all  relevant  actors  in  the  governance  system   are  made  to  comply  with  the  stipulated  ‘leadership  code  of  ethics’.
A  tribute  to  the  late  Mwalimu  Julius  Nyerere.
            Any   discussion   regarding   the   importance   of  ‘ethics’,  and  its  relevance   as  a  vital  qualification  for  leadership,  will  inevitably  evoke  memories  of  Mwalimu  Nyerere’s   teachings   in  respect  thereof.    Hence,   this    quickly  reminds   me  of  the  statement  made  by  Mwalimu  Julius  Nyerere  in  the  Tanganyika  Legislative  Council  in  May  1959  when  he  was  a  member  thereof,   in  which  he  said  the  following:-  “The  guaranteed  safeguard  of  the   peoples’  rights,  or  of  their   freedoms,   and  of  those  other  things  which  they  greatly  value,  is  the  presence   of   what  I  will  call  “ the  ethic  of  the  nation  .  .  .  If  the  people  of  a  given  nation  do  not  have    a  ‘national  ethic’  to  guide  them;     it   really  does  not  matter   what  kind  of  Constitution  you  frame  for  them;  for   such  people  can  still  become  victims  of  tyranny  from  their  unethical   leaders  .  .  .   We   in  Tanganyika,  must  therefore    endeavour    continuously   to  build  a  “ national   ethic”  for  ourselves;   for  it  is   only  the  existence  of   such    ‘national   ethic’  that  will,  for  example,   oblige   even  the  Head  of  State,  whoever  he  may  be,   to  always  pause  before  taking   any  action  that  appears  to  be    controversial,   and  caution  himself  thus:   I  know  that   I  have  the  power  to  do  this  under  the  Constitution;   but  I  will  not  do  it,  because   it  will  be  a  breach  of  the  national  ethic”.
             It  is,   presumably,   this   particular commitment   to  build  “a  national  ethic”,   that  must  have  moved  President  Nyerere  to  include  the  “Leadership  code”  in   the  famous   Arusha   Declaration   of  1967.   Thus,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,   President  Magufuli   is  faithfully   following  the  footsteps  of   Mwalimu  Nyerere,  by    quietly   implementing  the  provisions  of  the  (seemingly)  now    abandoned   historic  Arusha   Declaration.    And  this   adds  value  to   President  Magifuli’s    efforts;  for  it  even   negates  Mark  Anthony’s  contention  in  Shakespeare’s  Julius  Caesar,  in  which  he  said   that  “the  evil  that  men  do   lives  after  their  death;   but  the  good  is  often  interred  with  their  bones”.   Thanks  to  President  Magufuli’s   initiatives,  the  “good”  that  Mwalimu  Nyerere  did   regarding  the  need  to  create  “a  national  ethic”  was,   fortunately,    “not   interred  with  his  bones  on  14th  October,  1999;   but  has  lives  on,   even  long  after   his  death.
The  Nyerere  Prize  for  Ethics.
Having   thus   referred   to   Mwalimu   Nyerere’s  firm   stance  on  the   matter  of  leadership  ethics;     I  should  perhaps   take  this  opportunity,  to  also  make  reference  to  the  existence  of  a  seemingly   little  known  award,  which  is  the  “Nyerere  Prize  for  Ethics”.                                                                               
            Not  long  after  Mwalimu  Nyerere’s  death,    a  gathering  of  Representatives   from  different  African  countries  (with  active  support  from  many  other  individuals  and  Organizations),   took  the  significant  step  of  establishing  an  African  Continental  Award,  to be  known  as  the  “Nyerere  Prize  for  Ethics”;   which  they   instituted  in  honour  of  the  late  Mwalimu  Julius  Nyerere   in  recognition  of  his  exemplary  ethical   leadership  of  Tanzania.   The  said   Prize  is  intended  to  be  awarded  to  African   leaders   “who  have  demonstrated  outstanding  ethical  conduct  in  their  leadership  roles”.   I  am  not  aware  of  any  African  leader  who  has   so  far  been  granted  this  Award;   but   it  is  important   for    its  existence   to  be  widely   known  and   propagated.
The   place   of  ethics  in  elections.
                A  general  election  is,  basically, an  activity  in  selecting  persons  who  will become   government  leaders  at  the  different  levels  of  the  country’s  governance   for  the  ensuing  five  year  period.      The  books  of  authority  on  the  general  subject  of  leadership,  define  leadership  as  “the  ability  to  influence,  or  inspire  others,  to  move  in  a  given  direction,  or  to  undertake  some  purposeful  action;  plus  inducing  obedience  by  voluntary  consent,  respect,  loyalty,  and  cooperation”;    and  further  that  “leadership  is,   essentially,   a  kind  of  influence-relationship  based   on  trust,  obligation,  commitment,  and  shared  vision”.   
For  purposes  of  emphasis,  I  will  repeat  what  I  stated   at  the  beginning  of  this  article,  namely    that,  as  part  of  the  ‘warming  up’  to  the  forthcoming   October  general  election,    I  am  making   this  presentation    primarily   in  order  to  contribute  to  the  enhancement  of  the  voters’  knowledge  and  understanding  of  this   matter,  namely    that   the  ‘ethics  of  the  individual   candidate’   is  a  vital  qualification  which  needs  to  be  taken  into  consideration   when  deciding  on  which  of  the   15   Presidential   candidates   deserves  to  be  given     victory    at  this  year’s   Presidential    election.                                                                                                        This   is   important   because,   ethics  is  the heart  of  leadership.   Hence,   as  an  additional    qualification,  the   country’s   President   should,  as  a  matter  of  course,  be  deeply  conscious  of   the  role,  and  significance,   of  ethics  as  a  vital  component  of  leadership,  and   be  fully  committed  to  its  observance.                               According  to   the  same   books  of  authority  on    leadership,   “some  people  become  leaders  because  they  possess  certain  talents,  charisma,  or  passion;  or  because  of  their  wealth,  job  title,  or  family  name.  Others  become  leaders  because  they  possess  great  minds  or  ideas,  or  they  can  tall  compelling  stories;   and   then  there  are  those  who  stumble  into  leadership  because  of  the   times  they  live  in,  or  the  circumstances  in  which  they  find  themselves”.                                       It  is  my    humble   submission   that   we,  the  voters  of  Tanzania,  should   always  endeavour    to    elect ,  as  our  top  leaders,  only   those   persons  who,  to  quote  from  the  Nyerere  Prize  for  Ethics:    “have   demonstrated  outstanding    ethical  conduct  in  their  leadership   roles”.  
(will  continue  next  week)
piomsekwa@gmail.com    /  0754767576.
Source: Daily News and Cde Msekwa today.


Wednesday, 23 September 2020

Today is 12 Years after the Death of Hoigen Ekwalla Musician From Cameroon



TWO MONTHS WITHOUT MKAPA


It is exactly three months since former President Benjamin Mkapa passed on. His legacy still shines as we remember  him as a leader who admitted his failure openly and thereby apologized. The man who initiated radical changes for our country. His diplomatic skills he used to reconcile many countries facing conflict will always be missed. Life is a very big fable. For, it is like Mkapa passed on just yesterday. 

Tuesday, 22 September 2020

Will Donald Trump Make America Gleet Again?


Historically, the independence and the confederacy of the United States were realised through violence or revolutionary wars (1775-1783). Its economic marvels and military muscles were attained by criminality and violence. Refer to how the US had to fight its mother, the British Empire to achieve independence; how it used the barrel of gun to unite noncompliant states. Furthermore, refer to how the US used slave to create the capital that hurled it to economic world dominance and; how it nuked Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Despite being enacted in 1930, the US has never ratified the Forced Labour Convention, and the Employment Policy Convention, 1964. FYI, up until now, the US has never ratified 46 international instruments on various important issues.  Refer to how it gained its world political legerdemain by plotting against or killing many recalcitrant leaders such as Chilean president Salvador Allende, Jacobo Árbenz (Guatemala), Patrice Lumumba (DRC) and many more.  

Although the US is naturally a violent state, it’s become more violent under untoward president Donald Trump who saw many police killings he seems to enjoy and support as he recently showed when he went to Kenosha–––where a black man was gunned down by the police–––to support racist and trigger-happy cops. What an insult to the American population including the culprit himself and his base! One’s to be a killer and a racist to shamelessly do so.  When he bald-facedly supported murders and racist, Trump’s quoted as saying while in Kenosha “you went through hell just a few days ago, but I feel so safe. … We’re safe because of law enforcement.” Who went to through the hell between those Trump’s addressing (killer cops) and their preys (Afro-Americans)? What a humungous blooper! Who’s practically safe in the hands of such murderers or gory law enforcement agents? Any white person and cops of course. Was there any lucid and wise reason of commending the law enforcement agents while one of theirs was implicated (via live footages of the shooting) in the murder?

Though the US is naturally an apartheid state, under Trump, it’s become more xenophobic than ever before. Listen to or watch any American media. You’ll hear words such as ‘the cops shot a black man’ or ‘a white cop shot a Latino.’ Why mentioning the colour of a person while all Americans are Americans? Another proof that the US under Trump’s become more racist and riskier revolves around the revitalisation of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement that became more vocal recently after the increase of racial related police murders of Americans who are not white.

Needless to say, the US is a warring nation ever since it’s created. However, under Trump it’s exacerbated this proclivity. Refer to how the US invented trade war with China simply because it showed the possibility of taking over its superpower crown. Before the dust settled, under Trump, the US does no longer enjoy cordial trade relationship with Europe one of its chief allies.  Although China-US trade war’s the foremost one, Trump also went to trade wars with Canada, the EU, India and Mexico. Such idiocy had some knock-on effects on US economy that’s likely to lose squillions if not gazillions of dollars.

Traditionally, US foreign policy is ineffectual and imperious. Anybody who doesn’t rave according to its jingle is banned or bested as is currently the case with Iran and Venezuela. Under Trump–––a poor bin-Adam who knows nothing about the world–––US’ foreign policy has become a mumbo jumbo sort of affair. Refer how he called African and some Latin American countries shitholes not to mention continually calling Mexicans drug paddlers and rapists whom is preventing from entering his country by erecting a wall on the border of the two countries.

Trump hasn’t only lost it on foreign policy only but also on home front. His mishandling of Covid-19 pandemic is now staring on his face. To show how ignorant the man is, once suggested that people should be injected with decontaminators to kill the virus in their bodies.

What’s more, the ostensible leader of the Free World’s no longer free. Before pondering on freedom, remind yourself of democracy, which the US likes to tutor to others. There’s no way there can be freedom without competent and dependable democracy. To be a leader of the Free World one has to be elected in the free, fair and credible election. Was the election of Trump free, fair and credible? How’d it be while nobody’s ever denied Russian interference? Even birds know that Trump is but a clone of Vladimir Putin. Politically, you can call Don Trump Don VladPut if not a Russian understudy. To prove that under Trump democracy doesn’t make sense, he recently urged his followers to vote twice.

Although the US asserts to be an epitomic democracy, currently, it can’t even mimic democracy. We need to ask ourselves. What type of democracy has the US become under Trump? If we consider how the White House was turned into a Trump family private estate after Don became president, the US is a derisory sort of democracy if not a democrazy. Better Saudi Arabia and other Gulf kingdoms and emirs that openly declared their demesne devoid of any gist of democracy. To prove how Trump is more of a king than a president, he’s sprightlier relationship with the dictators in North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Russia etc.

After being sworn in president, Trump assembled his children, in-laws, business buddies, conspirators and gangs to run the show. Refer to how scandal after scandal surfaced after Trump became president. Google the following names to know who’s who in Trump’s crime pond in Washington: Michael Cohen aka Trump’s fixer, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, Rick Gates. This is not all. The list goes on and on not to mention the mother of scandals that’ll erupt after Don vacates the WH next November, tax aversion and womanizing, gagging sex-providers etc. To give you a tipoff, what to uncover aren’t only scandalous but also reeky, especially for the country that conceits itself of being the archetypal of mature and true democracy.

We can go even deeper as far as Trump’s netherworld is concerned. To prove the point, almost all of Trump’s ex-wives were not Americans. How did he get them? He did nothing wrong provided the US has never ratified the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others, 1950 and the Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and Registration of Marriage, 1962. Under Trump, immigrant juvenile and children were detained others separated from their parents. Trump wanted the law that protects young immigrants repealed.  Again, if Trump is a true patriot, who loves is country–––as he play-acts to be­­­–––why did he marry foreigners as if his country was barren of women? Is there anything fishy behind this proclivity?  

When it comes to human rights, the US is a renowned violator of human rights. refer to how it maintained racism up until recent times. To make matters worse, the US has never ratified the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958. As for the general application of Human Rights, despite the fact that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was enacted in 1948, up until now, the US is one of the nations that have never ratified it. Similarly, the US has never ratified many other international instruments such as the International Criminal Court (ICC). Wait a wee bit. Do you know that the US has never ratified even its own convention, namely the American Convention on Human Rights? What else do you want to pass your judgment as an American voter and a citizen of the world for those who can’t vote but have the sway to American voters? For Americans, I know you think you are extraordinary humans because your country’s the mightiest currently. Under Trump however, the opposite it the case. For the guy who promised you to dry the pond in Washington’s plagued it with his corrupt and selfish acquaintances, broods and chums. The guy who promised to make America great again–––though it’s never been great at any time–––has generated it to the level it’s never reached in its history.

In sum, intuiting his incompetence and the price he’ll soon pay thereof come election day, Trump’s already been worked up so as to show desperation to the extent that’s never been seen in American politics. He once said that if he loses election there can erupt civil war in the US. To show more hopelessness, Trump’s quoted recently as saying that the democrats are going to rig elections. How while Trump’s the one who has the power they seek to wrestle from his grip? These are the signs of despondency and confusion. Will America repeat the mistake allowing Donald Trump to make America gleet again? It’s upon them to decided.

Source: African Executive Magazine today.

Sunday, 20 September 2020

Sudan teaches Malians not to snuggle with the military

What you need to know:
The junta in Mali have reciprocated what the Sudanese junta perfected. It is co-opting some opposition elements in order to cling unto power illegally and contrary to the will of Malians.
The army, just like anywhere, isn’t after ruling the country but looting the public coffers or creating and doing their illicit businesses easily and safely.
They are also holding on to power to protect themselves from any criminal liability like Bashir’s generals did.
            In the long run, when the true colours of the army surfaces, Malians will not only be crying but also paying dearly for having trusted the military.
             After being tired of their tyrant who soared to power democratically, Malians seem to have forgotten the danger coup d’états present so as to stoop before the putsch that arrested former president Ibrahim Boubacar Keita and forced him to dissolve his government and resign thereafter.
The stance Malians have taken is no different from those Sudanese took after pulling down theirs, Omar Hassan al-Bashir. Initially, Sudanese supported the junta for not supporting the tyrant, which weakened him, so, too, they didn’t want the army to seize power. What transpired during the struggle to dethrone Bashir was a very precarious and tricky situation. Two desperate and disparate sides sought to use each other for the benefit of the one of them. Because of this the army became instrumental in dislodging Bashir the same way it was in maintaining him in power for over three decades of corruption and misrule that saw Sudan; and later Sudan go to the dogs. It was under the mutualism with Bashir that the army became an accessory of the crime of destroying Sudan that ended up into two feeble and self-destructive countries.
    On its side, mass action against Bashir–as was led by the opposition–wanted Bashir out so that there could be a democratic government. It didn’t come to be after the army seized power after deposing the tyrant. This reminds us of the ballad of the piousness of the cat that cheated rats. Seeing the cats counting religious beads, rats wrongly thought he no longer ate them. As the day went by, the number of their little ones started to decrease. Later, the rats found that the cat was eating them under the pretext of religio. 
    Essentially, the army didn’t interfere to save Bashir nor democracy. Nope. It had its hidden agenda of seizing the power from both Bashir and the revolutionists, which it did and succeeded to lure the opposition in the snare of forming the government together. If you want to tame a greedy dog guarding the property, throw the bones and offal to it as you loot the property.
After snatching power, the junta found that it would not rule without ganging up with a few elements from the opposition that actually instigated and executed the move that saw Bashir pulled down unceremoniously.
        Similarly, the junta in Mali seems to have reciprocated what the Sudanese junta perfected. For, it decided to scheme how to co-opt some opposition elements in order to cling unto power illegally and contrary to the will of Malians. Thus, it recently said it would rule for three years; and thereafter would conduct elections. The ECOWAS didn’t buy into this chicanery. Thereof, the junta recently said that it would like to be given two years to rule without telling exactly why other democratic institutions or a government rule can’t. The ECOWAS stood its ground by refuting to buy into this ploy.  Before long, the junta came with the suggestion of ruling for 18 months. This shows how desperate the junta currently is. The ECOWAS must stay put to see to it that the junta isn’t given even a single minute to sanction its illegal stay in power. Legally speaking, the army has no business to do in the statehouse. It must be forced to go back to the barracks.
Good lessons
        There are some good lessons the Malians can gather from Sudan whose revolution the army robbed and superimposed its will on citizens who are now regretting this action. The following are important lessons for Malian to learn from Sudan:
        Firstly, the army in Mali, just like anywhere, isn’t after ruling the country but, its tops are after seizing and using the opportunity of being in power either to rob the public coffers or create and do their illicit businesses easily and safely. This is easy to clench. In Africa, politics is a very resonant business that assures those partaking it of quick mammon.
       Secondly, for those facing some accusations of any criminal liabilities of or liabilities of any kind, being in power provides immunity against prosecution, even persecution. Refer to how the generals in Khartoum who were supposed to be bundled together and delivered to the ICC along with Bashir they toppled and refused to dispatch are still free people lording it over Sudanese not to mention keeping their taps well supplied.
        Thirdly, the army is likely to squander the country and its resources–as is the case in Sudan currently–so as to make the situation palpably worse than it was under the government they toppled. This is exactly what’s ongoing in Sudan where the junta has proved to be ineptly corrupt thanks to the lack of experience and legality. Sudanese rose against Bashir because life was hard thanks to over two decades of decadence and incompetence. Essentials such as bread, flour and others were so expensive that common people wouldn’t afford them.  Further, the situation has direly worsened after the fall of Bashir so as to force Sudanese to envisage on going back to the drawing board to pull down the junta. Salaries are still small. Unemployment is now swelling whereby by one out of five employable people are jobless. Thus, living costs are exceedingly high.
        When it comes to Malians, it seems, the opposition has been lured into a trap. When it starts beating them, will we really waste our breath for them if they don’t hark what we’re now telling them? Learning from Sudan’s experience, as an African country facing the same experience, theirs should be once beaten, twice shy. Essentially, experience shows that the lesson humans learned from history is not learning from it so as to repeat the mistakes. African sage has it that he who beats the drum for the mad man to dance is no better than the mad man himself.
        Why should Malians not trust and allow the army to remain in power?
Firstly, the army was the part of the deposed government. Thus, whatever mistakes the former regime committed touches on the army, as well. We recently evidenced the same in Zimbabwe where the army supported mass action to end up remaining in bed with the ZANU-PF after toppling Mugabe to end up bringing more pangs and twangs to the country. Where is Zimbabwe after Mugabe? The same was replicated in Sudan thereafter. Where is Sudan after Bashir? Nusquam of course.
        Secondly, by allowing the army to remain in power, Malians will be setting another precedent that’ll motivate other soldiers to take power illegally. Not all baboons who enter a maize field come out satisfied. Never shall the hyena become a lamb; nor a snake become a rope.
        Thirdly, Malians show how they didn’t learn from the mistakes former juntas committed in Mali before. The child of a rat is a rat, a Malagasy proverb has it.
        Fourthly, by purging the former regime and cohabitate with the current, Malians will become part and parcel of the misrule the army will bring in just like the others before it. You don’t teach your dog to eat fowls, for it will start hunting your fowls in lieu of guarding them.
        Fifthly, Malians need to sequester the opportunity from the support the ECOWAS has already extended to them to see to it that the army goes back to the barracks as soon as possible. It worked in The Gambia; and it can likewise work in Mali shall Malians fully and practically support it.
        In sum, what is ongoing in Sudan has many lessons for Malians to not trust and entrust power to the junta. It might seem to be working for them temporarily. In the long run, when the true colours of the army surfaces, Malians will not only be crying but also paying dearly for the mistakes and myopia that have blindly and wrongly convinced them to share power with the junta. It is always easier to create a problem than to solve it. More importantly, the gratitude of a donkey is a kick. Put this in minds dear Malian brethren.
Source: Daily Nation today.