Picha ya Leo Aliyeko Juu Mngoje Chini

Nani alijua kuwa waliokuwa wakijifanya kuiweka serikali mifukoni mwao kwa vile walikuwa wakila na wakubwa kama James Rugemalira na mshirika wake Singh katika wizi wa kutisha wa ESCROW wangeishia kunyea debe? Kuna haja ya kutenda haki kwa umma na kujali mali zake badala ya kuutumia kama njia ya kujitajirisha huku umma ukiachwa unateseka bila sababu. kwa umri huu mateso haya  ya nini? Wanaosema rais John Pombe Magufuli hajapambana na ufisadi wawakumbuke wateule hawa. Tunangoja kupata picha ya Simon Kisena huku tukingojea kwa makini kumuona Lugumi naye akituonyesha vitu vyake. Hii ndiyo picha ya leo.

The politics of Inconsistency

This cartoon by Gado from the Daily Nation today has attracted our attention. It unveils satirizes and shames double-faced and inconsistent leaders who say this today and say that tomorrow. By the look of of the cartoon, indeed, it has ticked all the boxes as far as chameleonism is concerned in African politics. Although the target of this cartoon is a Kenyan leader, it speaks volumes vis-a-vis the military in Sudan which was part and parcel of Omar Bashir's dictatorship to start distancing itself from him.

Bila Kusulubiwa-Hapachina Kutukwa

IN MEMORIAM: AN IMPSSIONED PLEA FOR COMMEMORATING MWALIMU NYERERE’s BIRTHDAY.

                                                                                                             

               Last Saturday was the 13^th day of April, in the blessed year 2019.  But, unfortunately it is a date whose historical significance is almost unknown to the vast majority of Tanzanian men and women.Today’s article is designed and presented as a bold attempt to propagate and promote the proposal that  Mwalimu Nyerere’s birthday, namely the 13^th day of April, be officially recognized for the purpose of commemorating the birth date of the Father of our nation, Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere.  This proposal is made following the commendable initiative which was taken by the MWALIMU NYERERE MEMORIAL ACADEMY, KIVUKONI. That Institution has consistently been holding some special academic functions, to commemorate the birth date of the Father of our nation. For example, on 13^th April, 2015; President Jakaya Kikwete (as he was then), went to the Kivukoni Academy to inaugurate a new leadership training programme. The said programme has been accorded the distinguished status of an academic “Chair”, and was appropriately given the Kiswahili name of “Kibwete cha Mwalimu Nyerere”. And, by the grace of God, plus a bit of good luck on my part, President Kikwete also installed me as the ‘founder’ Chairman of that ‘Kibwete’. Translated into English, the word ‘Kibwete’ means a small box, or container, for preserving family valuables, such as jewels. In the light of that meaning, the name ‘Kibwete’ is admirably suitable, and indeed most appropriate, for this particular leadership training programme , which is aimed at preserving knowledge  and appreciation of  Mwalimu Nyerere’s outstanding leadership ethics; and endeavor to propagate and promote such  knowledge through the usual academic methods of teaching, research, and evaluation.In fact, it has now become an established practice for the Kivukoni Academy to hold seminars, or workshops, around this date, the 13^th of April of every year, including this year, 2019; whose workshop theme was “Kumbukizi za Mwalimu Nyerere”; in commemoration of Mwalimu Nyerere’s birthday.Thus, this presentation is made in the desire to propagate and promote this idea of commemorating Mwalimu Nyerere’s birthday beyond that academy, to a wider audience of Tanzanians. 

Celebrating his death is inappropriate.

In my opinion, we should now be moving away from the current practice of only commemorating Mwalimu Nyerere’s death annually on 14^th October; and, instead, start commemorating his birthday. The 13^th day of April. This proposal is made on the grounds that through such official observance of his birthday, the nation will be commemorating his life and works, rather than the sad event of his death.   

Any person’s death is a sad event, which is really not fit for celebrations. And, in the case of a distinguished leader and statesman like Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, his death represents the sad and sorrowful culmination of his immense contributions to the welfare and development of the people of the United Republic of Tanzania.   On the contrary, his birthday represents the happy entry on the stage, of the country’s liberator from colonialism, and of his shining successes in laying the firm foundations for the nation’s unity, human equality, and mutual respect; which we are presently continuing to enjoy. It is on the basis of this submission, that today’s article has been designed to focus on Mwalimu Nyerere’s memorable leadership contributions, in order to enable the younger, post Nyerere generation to gain some new insights, awareness, and understanding, of the departed Mwalimu Nyerere’s ethical life, plus his sterling works; a brief reminder of which, is presented in the paragraphs here below.  

Mwalimu Nyerere the person.

Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere has been variously described as a Humanist, Politician, Thinker, and Statesman. Indeed, he was all of that, and much more. He was an ardent believer in peace, and a unique mobilizer of people. He was a devout catholic, but a strong believer in the separation of religion from politics. He was a modest man in his personal life, and hated pomposity in his official capacity. These were the ideals that dominated his entire life as a leader, first as President of TANU from July 1954; then as Prime Minister of Tanganyika from May 1961; President of the Republic of Tanganyika from December 1962, and of the United Republic of Tanzania from April 1964, until his voluntary retirement from the Presidency in October 1985.

Abundant literature is readily available, on all aspects of his leadership contributions to not only Tanzania, but also to Africa as a whole. Indeed, the postcolonial history of Central and Southern Africa is closely associated with his name, because of his intense commitment and contribution to the liberation struggle against colonialism of all the countries in that Region of Africa.

Mwalimu Nyerere the philosopher.

The word “philosophy” has several meanings, including that it is an academic discipline, which is focuses on the study or search for knowledge concerning the mundane matters of life and the universe. However, in the context of my presentation, I am using the word ‘philosophy’ to mean a set of beliefs, or attitude to life, that guides or determines a person’s behaviour.  Mwalimu Nyerere certainly had his own set of beliefs and attitude of mind which guided his behaviour and his actions.

I think it is fair to say that Mwalimu Nyerere’s philosophies were largely determined by the objective conditions and circumstances prevailing at the relevant material time. For example, during the initial period of his leadership, colonialism was the dominant political factor in Africa. Consequently, this factor had a dominating influence on Mwalimu Nyerere’s thinking and actions during that particular period. He was of the settled view that colonialism was a violation of the human right of the colonized people to self-determination.  He therefore made it one of his major responsibilities to participate actively in the struggle for the liberation of all African countries.                                                                                                          On the other hand, his governance philosophy was “to create and maintain national unity, based on genuine respect for human equality”. And this was also largely influenced by the conditions prevailing at the material time; specifically, his fear for the potential disunity likely to be caused by the existence of  rampant tribalism and ethnicity; plus the inevitable conflicts which would be caused by individual desires to accumulate wealth. There are numerous governance policy decisions which were made by President Nyerere, that readily attest to his application of this philosophy, including the following:-

Decisions that promoted national unity

The greater part of President Nyerere’s endeavors  during the years immediately following the achievement of the country’s independence, was fully focused on efforts to build sustainable national unity among  people of diverse tribal origins and affiliations. His strategy for achieving this objective was based on a two pronged approach: the first was to dismantle, quite rapidly, the colonial structural impediments to national unity; and the second was to design and introduce, equally rapidly, new social policies which would facilitate the achievement of this desired objective.  The implementation of the first strategy included the repeal, in 1963, of a law cited as “The Chiefs’ Ordinance”; which had vested on the tribal Chiefs very crucial Administrative and Judicial powers over their tribal ‘subjects’, thus creating a multitude of ethnic loyalties to their respective tribal Chiefs.  The second strategy was implemented through the introduction of new social and economic policies, aimed at integrating society, specifically targeting the Youth; in the crucial area of Education and training; such as the introduction of compulsory ‘National Service’ programmes, which required selected groups of  young people to live together and work together under special supervision, for a specified period; thus enabling them to quickly forget their diverse tribal or religious backgrounds, and to develop new n be presented in summary form as follows:-friendships across the board, including widespread inter-tribal and some inter-denominational marriages.

Mwalimu Nyerere’s Ujamaa philosophy.

This is the most widely acknowledged philosophy commonly attributed to Mwalimu Nyerere. Because of the length of time that has elapsed since its inauguration in February 1967; many of the current generation of Tanzanians may not even be aware of its contents. I can do no more than encourage them to read the Arusha Declaration document itself in order to absorb the nuggets of wisdom contained therein.  But briefly stated, the essential features of the Ujamaa philosophy, can be presented in summary form as follows:-  

(i) That Ujamaa was, primarily, aimed at introducing EQUALITY between Tanzanians, in compliance with the TANU creed of “Binadamu wote ni sawa”. This is evidenced by another statement appearing in the Arusha Declaration’s list of “the basic principles of Ujamaa”, which is cited as “The fundamental equality of all human beings, and the right of every individual to dignity and respect”. It is evidenced further by Mwalimu Nyerere’s farewell speech delivered in Bunge on 29^th July, 1985, on the eve of his voluntary retirement from the Presidency, in which he said the following: “Kazi iliyokuwa muhimu zaidi kuliko zote kwangu, ilikuwa ni kazi ya Kujenga Taifa lenye umoja, kwa misingi ya heshima na usawa wa binadamu.  Nadhani leo naweza kusema bila kusita, kwamba kwa shabaha hii kuu na ya msingi kabisa, tunayo haki ya kujivunia mafanikio tuliyoyapata”.

(ii) That Ujamaa was aimed directly at preventing the growth of capitalism, or the accumulation of individual wealth, among Tanzanians. This is evidenced by the statement in principle no. 7 of the ‘basic Ujamaa principles’, which reads as follows: “It is the responsibility of the State to intervene actively in the economic life of the nation in order to ensure the well-being of all the citizens; and to prevent the exploitation of any one person by another, or the accumulation of individual wealth in a manner that is inconsistent with the existence of a classless society”.

(iii) Catch 22: That Ujamaa was, basically, a matter of faith, or an attitude of mind.  This is evidenced by the statement which appears in the Arusha Declaration document under the heading Ujamaa ni imani”, as follows (translated from Kiswahili): However, Ujamaa cannot establish itself, because, basically, it is a matter of faith. It can only be established and sustained by people who have complete faith in its efficacy”. In my humble opinion, this is what explains the apparent ‘abandonment’ of the Ujamaa policy in January 1991, when the CCM National Executive Committee meeting in Zanzibar, obviously acting under the influence of immense political pressure generated by the harsh economic conditions of the 1980s; adopted the so-called “Zanzibar declaration”, which subsequently earned the negative reputation of having “killed” the Arusha Declaration; imputing that the CCM NEC ‘had lost faith’ in the efficacy of Ujamaa.   It is my honest submission however, that the Arusha Declaration was NOT ‘killed’ in Zanzibar, it was only ‘put in abeyance’.  

Thus, it is in the forlorn hope of rekindling the nation’s interest and renewed faith in Ujamaa; that this proposal is being made, namely to consider celebrating Mwalimu Julius Nyerere’s birthday, the 13^th day of April of every year, and, even more importantly, devoting such celebrations to reflect deeply on Mwalimu Nyerere’s important contributions in laying the firm foundations for the well-being and continued peaceful existence of our great nation (Kumbukizi za Mwalimu Nyerere).                                           May his soul rest in eternal peace.

piomsekwa@gmail.com   / 0754767576.

Source: The Daily News and courtesy of Cde Msekwa.

If He Were Alive He'd Have Been 97

April 13, 1922 is the day the late father of nation Mwl Julius kambarage Nyerere was born. Due to the exceptional and exemplary work he did not only for Tanzania but the world at large, we always miss and remember him. Though he is not physically with us, he will forever be with us spiritually. Thus, commemorating his birthday is but a little we can offer to him and his family. Had he been alive, Mwl Nyerere would have been 97 years old this week. Nyerere died aged 77 years 20 years ago. Despite that, Nyerere has always remained in our heart as the leader who ruled Tanzania accountably and diligently. his Ujamaa philosophy is still relevant for delivering justice and emancipating all those who are still under colonial situations of whatever type.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY MWL Julius Kambarage 

Sudan with Its Exceptionalities

After the fall of Sudanese long time despot, Omar Bashir, Sudan has added another feather to its cap. Methinks Sudan becomes the first country on earth to have three presidents in one week. April goes to the annals of history that there was once a country that had three different president within three days as they succeeded each other. On Wednesday 10th April, 2019 Sudan's president was Bashir before Ahmed Awad ibn Auf stepped in on Thursday 11th after the army booted down Bashir. The next day namely 12th, ibn Auf was removed from power after demonstrators accused him of being a Bashir person. On the same day, Abdel Fattah Abdelrahman Burhan was sworn in to take over from ibn Auf  him a third president within one week. Sudanese are entering the books of history as the people who were able to overthrow two military despots in 24 hours. This has never been done anywhere on earth.
          Apart from having three president in three days, Sudan is renowned for being an African country that regards itself as an arab one. It black people still believe are arabs though arabs always have never accepted them. This shows Sudan's exceptionality when it comes to self-perception and self-identification. Actually, Sudan is always running away from its shadow. When you want to know if an animal you have is a goat, just take it to other goats. If it truly is goats will accept it. If it is not, goats will refuse to accept it as one of theirs.
        Another face of Sudan revolves around genocide in Darfur. Despite almost all Dafuris being muslims, their brethren muslim from Sudan perpetrated genocide agains them as they were led by Bashir and ibn Awf. This is Sudan whose people have now awakened and taken on their dictators.           Another exceptionality that Sudan enjoys currently is that it has become a first Arab-speaking and self-perceiving country to execute African spring successfully. Burkina Faso was the first African country to launch its African Spring that saw its long time despot Blaise Compaore pulled down before  The Gambia replicated the same by showing  Jammeh the door. This means, other sister countries under stinking dictators such as Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon, Togo, Uganda and others need to take a leaf from Sudan. This said, who will follow after Bashir? Time will accurately and timely tell.

CRIMINALITY PERPETRATED BY POLITICAL PARTIES: A DISTURBING TREND IN OUR POLITICS.

                On Monday last week, the Registrar of Political Parties gave 14-days legal notice to ACT Wazalendo, requiring that Opposition Political Party “to explain why it should not be struck off the register of political parties”  for having committed certain specified criminal offences, including that of allowing its followers to burn another political party’s flag.  Such criminal acts, being perpetrated by members of a respectable political party are, to say the least, wholly disturbing and worrisome.

Political parties and their designated purposes.  

                Whither our political parties?  That is the big question. In my article of last week in this column, I encouraged political analysts to pay  particular attention to the emerging ‘unusual’ political situation,  which was created by Seif Shariff Hamad’s action of ‘nomadic politics”,  and  urged them to take a new look at the direction wherein our political parties appear to be moving which, seemingly, is manifestly away from the designated purposes of political parties; which is, basically, “to acquire state power through participating in, and winning, a general election;  in an open  process whereby political parties are free  to compete by presenting their different policies and programmes to the electorate, and each party  trying to persuade the voters, through organized campaign meetings, to vote for their particular policies and programme options”.   

           And for a start in the direction of that discussion, in order to set the ball rolling, I further opined that:  “in my humble opinion, there is a strong cultural impediment which prevents our political parties from abiding by the ‘rules of the game’ i.e. those that govern political parties’ behaviour”. This cultural impediment is “the lack of the requisite multi-party political culture” which is what accounts for the negative behavioral ‘diversions’ of some of our political party leaders that we are witnessing from time to time, such as the exercise of ‘nomadic’ and/or ‘tourism’  politics;  plus the criminality that appears to be  creeping in. 

               I also pointed out that the theory and practice of ‘party politics’ is not, in fact,  part of our traditional governance cultures, which were based on monarchical rule by traditional Chiefs, with no participation whatsoever by political parties.  In today’s article, I wish to underscore and elaborate that point regarding the lack of the requisite multi-party political culture, and therefore the urgent for us need to cultivate that culture. I do fervently hope, that this discussion will be taken up in earnest by our professional political analysts. I believe it is good for the political education of our younger generation of politicians.                                                                             

                        On my part, it has indeed been my firm contention, which I first expressed in my book titled “Reflections on the First Decade of Multi-party Politics in Tanzania” (Nyambari Nyangwine Publishers, Da es Salaam); that the “lack of a multi-party culture” in our societies, is what is at the core of the problems we are witnessing, relating to the operation of the multi-party system, simply because it is an ‘imposed’ political culture, which  is not deeply ingrained in our own traditional cultures. That is what partly explains why, when TANU was created as a political party way back in 1954, it quickly became a nationalist movement, to which almost all the people belonged. Thus, right from the beginning, making the country a de facto ‘One-Party state’; even before it became a de jure One-Party state in 1965.  There was therefore no opportunity for the people to get a proper exposure to the culture of multi-party politics, since the country continued to operate under the One-party system for 30 long years.

The multi-party political culture.

                I stated in my book referred to above, that “multi-party democracy is, essentially, a product of a culture which is deeply rooted in the Western countries of Europe and North America”; and said further that in many of the countries where this Western-based culture does not exist, there have, in every case, been problems in operating the multi-party political system in compliance with the specified ‘rules of the game’; and cited the following examples to provide  credible evidence in support of that contention.  (These were published in different issues of a journal cited as “The PARLIAMENTARIAN”  which is published by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association):-   Commenting in October 2000 on the Caribbean democracy situation, the Prime Minister of Grenada, Hon Keith Mitchell (MP), lamented as follows: “The Caribbean people have long had a reputation for passionate partisan debate in the adversarial form of Parliamentary democracy inherited from Westminster. But they also enjoyed the reputation of playing by the rules: the winners of the arguments took office, and the losers continued the debate from the Opposition Benches inside Parliament, and prepared for the next election.  But today, passionate political debates are being continued in an alarming number of cases, not in Parliament, but in the streets. And they are being pressed not by debate, but by demonstration.  Our acceptance of the Parliamentary system is being seriously eroded”.

           In our own case, we have seen how the  Opposition parties have often resorted to demonstrations and demands for public rallies in order to press their ‘arguments’; instead of continuing the partisan debates from the Opposition benches inside Parliament; according to the established  ‘rules of the game’

There are several other examples in different parts of the Commonwealth, which help to illustrate the existence of what I have described as the ‘lack of the requisite multi-party political culture’; such as the following:- The report in respect of Papua and New Guinea states thus: “Party politics in Papua New Guinea have generally been based on personalities, rather than policies. In this “big man” style of politics, votes are more likely to be won by family or clan affiliations, than through well-developed party policies”.   

           And the report on Haiti states as follows: “Party politics and party discipline are practically unknown in Haiti. Political parties in that country are often small bands of people, led by egomaniacs, and held together by patronage. While inside Parliament, party affiliation does not always guarantee agreement. The Government cannot get its programmes through Parliament, simply because the House often fails to reach a quorum and acts capriciously when it does, even though the majority of seats are held by the ruling party”.          

               There is also the report on Lesotho, which states as follows: “Ever since the independence of Lesotho, political activity in the country has been partisan in form, and exclusionary in character. Society has been Balkanized into new groupings, which call themselves political parties, dedicated to vying for, and excluding one another from, control of State power.  Political parties in Lesotho are the antithesis of nation building. This is the origin of the mutual disdain and repugnance that members of different political parties feel for each other, and this attitude has produced a basis for political instability that has become a permanent feature of politics in the country”.

Another reported example is that of Kenya, where it is reported as follows: “The re-introduction of political pluralism was one of the greatest developments in Kenya since independence. But it now appears that political parties have turned into a liability, not only stifling democracy, but also impeding the transformation of Kenya into a modern society. Virtually all political parties have sacrificed healthy political competition and internal democracy at the altar of individual aggrandizement”.

Emphasizing individual players, instead of party policies.

                A careful analysis of these statements reveals the true nature of the problem under discussion, which is ‘the diversionary tendency to rely on individual actors, instead of putting due emphasis on party policies and programmes’. This actually is what meant by statements like “politics in Papua and New Guinea have been based on personalities rather than well-developed party policies” (big man politics); OR (in Lesotho) “the disdain and repugnance that members of the different political parties feel for each other”.  OR (in Haiti) “Political parties in that country are often small bands of people led by egomaniacs, and held together by patronage”. OR (in Kenya) “virtually all political parties have sacrificed healthy political competition and democracy at the altar of personal aggrandizement”.

The by-products of politics based on personalities.

                This undesirable diversion to ‘personalities’ instead of ‘policies’ within political parties, has given rise to two other problems. These are: (i) the lack of democracy within the political parties themselves, and (ii): the emergence of the ‘Savimbi theory of elections’.

The lack of internal democracy within the political parties themselves can also fairly be attributed to the factor of ‘big man politics’.  In or own case, as a result of experience gained from the first two multi-party general elections of 1995 and 2000; the National Electoral Commission submitted the following recommendation to the Union Government: “Most of the problems regarding the nomination of candidates, are due to the lack of democracy within the political parties. Therefore, the Commission recommends that the Political Parties Act, 1992, be amended, to ensure the existence of democracy within the political parties”.

                The ‘Savimbi theory of elections’ is attributed to one Jonas Savimbi of Angola who, after losing  in his country’s  Presidential election (which had been carefully prepared and managed  under the close supervision of the international community), refused to recognize the results of that election, claiming that he had been cheated, and immediately declared that he was ‘going back to the bush’ to fight a guerrilla war against the democratically elected President who had defeated him. That is when some innovative political scientists called the said declaration, “the Savimbi theory of elections”, which they described as follows: “If you participate in an election, you MUST win. If you don’t win, you have been cheated. So, you must refuse to accept the results thereof, and start fighting the winning party”.   This, of course, is the surest way of creating chaos, or even violence, since the winning party will most likely respond by using state power to fight back, with serious negative consequences leading to breaches of the peace, and unnecessary harm to innocent citizens. Many of our readers will easily remember that these by-products have also affected our own political system, whereby the losers in Presidential elections refused to accept the results, loudly claiming that they ‘had been cheated’.

The  issue of criminality                                                                                                                                       But the issue of the emerging criminality in the conduct of political activities is an absolute negation of ‘civilized’ politics, and has been rightly condemned by the majority in our community. The threat by the Registrar of Political Parties to deregister ACT Wazalendo, appears to be part of this general condemnation. 

piomsekwa@gmail.com  / 0754767576.
Source: The Daily News today and for the Courtesy of Cde Msekwa himself.

Mjue Muanzilishi wa Simba wa Nyika William Kinyonga Aishie kama Ombaomba

MAGUFULI MPENDE MCHUKIE AKIONDOKA WENGI WATAMKUMBUKA

How Hamad Reaped What He Sowed and Fell on His own Sword

Costs of Hamad, Lipumba’s feud go beyond their party

            This piece came out three years ago showing how things would play out in what is now obvious in the politics of Bongo. As the fate would have it, it seems; the Chairman of the Civic United Front (CUF) Professor Ibrahim Lipumba and his Secretary General Seif Sharriff Hamad are hell-bent to kill it; and destabilise opposition in general. This is because the duo has never seen the mess they created; and how it’s slowly destroying the party. This isn’t only a big blow for the party but also for democracy in our country. By the look of things, the impasse the CUF has been in for a while is but a suicidal attempt for the party and its leadership.

            Considering the resources and time the mix-ups between the duo have already consumed not to mention the relationship gone sour, there is no way all or any of the two can benefit from the ongoing imbroglio without sitting on the round table and iron out their differences.  The duo has discretion to accept such advice or go on their suttee. However, surely the only winner is the ruling party. Due to hegemonic nature of our politics, it seems; the duo has hijacked the party so as to pointlessly leave the members in the cold. This means. The CUF has never belonged to the members. Instead, it has always been the private estate of the leaders. This is why, the members are not heard. Nor are their views accommodated in addressing the problems the party has, for long, faced.

            Interestingly, history has the tendency of replicating itself. Those who know how James Mapalala, the founder of the CUF, was thrown under the bus don’t wonder to see Hamad suffering from the same fate. Live by sword. Die by sword. So, too, those who wrongly thought that Hamad was using Lipumba now know how the duo was but strange bedfellows. Who was using whom? It isn’t easy to tell. More importantly, the CUF has always seen to incline to one side of the United Republic of Tanzania (URT). Refer to how Hamad entered into the Government of National Unity (GNU) in Visiwani without bothering to do the same in the Mainland. Strikingly, you wonder how one party can win in one side of the union and lose in the other. This shows where its priorities are between the duo.

            Demonstrably, the game the duo is playing is very lethal; however, thanks to their personal ambitions, they seem to pooh pooh it for their peril. For over a year, they’ve been trading insults, bloviating, pontificating, calling each other names and expelling each other in what started as a spat among others. There is no way they can maintain squabbles and meaningfully forge ahead. This is why they are easily played against each other; simply because they are playing in the hands of their enemies. What the duo is doing is like dancing with the devil thinking that there is a way one can get away with it. When two friends do their dirty laundry in the agora, the shame that comes therefrom affects both equally.

       Provided that the fate of the CUF is clear, what can be done to save or salvage it?

        Firstly, the duo must admit responsibility; and accept that they are the party of the problem but not the solution. Therefore, they should start addressing the problem based on this understanding instead of the blame game that has been going on for a long time. Knowing and admit the roles they have played in destabilising the party are key to the resolution of the conflict. In conflict resolution studies we say that there must be the stage at which the conflict must be allowed to thaw so that those ensnared in it can start using different lenses, positive instead of negative ones to view each other based on their needs.

         If the first mechanism flops, the members should shun; and thereafter expel the duo so that they can start afresh to either mend fences or tweak their parties.

         In sum, Hamad and Lipumba have the solutions to the problems they created. So, too, they have the means to fell the CUF. Destruction is easier than construction. Again, this being obvious, why Hamad and Lipumba are putting their dirty linens on the agora?

Source: Citizen Wed., 3 October, 2016.

“NOMADISME POLITIQUE” OR NOMADIC POLITICS: FORMER CUF SECRETARY-GENERAL DEFECTION TO ACT-WAZALENDO.

The defection to ACT-Wazalendo by  the former CUF Secretary-General, Maalim Seif Sharif Hamad on Monday 18th March, 2019; was the  hottest “breaking news” in the country’s political arena; with that big news suddenly dominating the communications networks. I have chosen to describe this action as “nomadic politics”, or ‘nomadisme politique’ in French. As will be shown below, this appeared to me to be the most appropriate, and befitting, description of what took place.               The dictionary definition of the word ‘nomad’ is given as “a member of a community that moves with its livestock (and family members) from place to place”. The former CUF Secretary-General has moved to his new political party, ACT-Wazalendo, with a large number of his followers and supporters (his political family members), which is typical of nomadic behaviour. 

To the best of my knowledge and recollection, this is completely new and unprecedented, and a real ‘first’, in all our history of defections by top-level politicians. This assertion is evidenced by the following  examples,  selected ad hoc from memory;  in all of which there was no such  massive  ‘follow the leader’ response by the defector’s  supporters.  Take the early example of TANU Secretary-General Oscar Kambona’s defection from TANU in 1967; and that of the then heavy weight politician Agustino Lyatonga Mrema’ defection to NCCR-MAGEUZI in 1995,( where he was received with just about the same amount of fanfare, plus high expectations of “strengthening the Opposition”), which however didn’t materialize.  And, more recently; by another top-level politician and former Prime Minister, Edward Lowassa’s defection from CCM in 2015; who defected to CHADEMA and later returned home; which I aptly described as “Domestic political tourism”.  

A matter of hero worship.

But the instant case of Mr. Hamad is entirely different. It is a distinctive demonstration of what is commonly recognized as “hero worship”, which is defined as “great admiration for somebody, because you think he is extremely attractive, intelligent, etc”.  I am here reminded of a story told by former President Ali Hassan Mwinyi, who gone on a visit to Pemba. He said that while  he was being driven through the streets, he expressed admiration at the high level of infrastructure development that had taken place since his previous visit;  and showered praise on the  then President of Zanzibar,  Amani Abeid Karume, for these outstanding achievements.  But, he said, he was quickly silenced by the response he got from the person who was driving him, whose unsolicited reply was thus: “Mzee, the people of Pemba are not impressed by what Karume is doing. All they want is their beloved Seif Sharrif Hamad to become President of Zanzibar.  He will surely bring much greater development than what you are seeing now”. Now, that is truly “hero worship”; i.e. a demonstration of a very sincere and committed admiration for an individual person. This is what helps to explain why so many of his supporters went along with him when he defected to ACT-Wazalendo on Monday 18th March, 2019.  

Hero worship on an empty stomach?

But that is, essentially, what may be described as “political business”. And this quickly  reminds me of a statement made by  a famous United States statesman,  Woodrow Wilson (1856 - 1924);  who is on record as having said the following  in a speech in New York, in 1912 : “Business underlies everything in our everyday life, including our spiritual life. Just witness the fact that even in the Lord’s Prayer, the first petition is for our daily bread. No one can worship God on an empty stomach!                                          Can ‘hero worship’ be done on an empty stomach?  Good food for thought.

The ‘Ambition’ and ‘Frustration’ factors in Hamad’s case.

In one of my previous articles in this column, I made strong submissions to the effect that although the individual motives which induce politicians to defect to other political parties will inevitably vary, but basically, they always revolve around two distinctive factors, which are the “push” factors on the one hand; and the “pull” factors on the other. The “push” factors are the (intolerable) conditions which literally  ‘force’ a person to quit his party and move to another; and the ‘pull’ factors are the attractive prospects which induce a person to join a given  party.  And these two factors are themselves promoted by two other factors, which are ‘Ambition’, and ‘Frustration’ respectively.

 In the instant case of Seif Sharrif Hamad, we have heard it ‘live’ from him stating the reasons for his move at a press conference which he convened specifically for that purpose.  His stated reason was “to place himself in a more conducive environment in which to carry forward his political objectives of fighting for political rights and for democracy”.  Such conducive environment had abruptly disappeared for him in CUF. And that was his ‘push’ factor, which pushed him out of CUF. However, it is no secret that his sole political objective is “to remove CCM from power in Zanzibar, and acquire that power himself”.  That is his insatiable ‘ambition’ (the ‘pull’ factor); which attracted him to ACT-Wazalendo.            

It should be pretty obvious that in making his move, Mr. Hamad was in fact looking for a platform where he will continue to play “primus inter pares” (first among equals) in the Opposition arena.  No wonder he chose not to join CHADEMA, with whom CUF had willingly partnered during the 2015 Presidential elections, by providing the candidate for running mate.  And all this is being done under the smoke screen of “fighting for political rights and for democracy”. But, in reality, in such cases where democracy within political parties is being so deliberately ‘suffocated’ by such insatiable personal ambitions to acquire power by leading politicians, aren’t we, the people of this country, being taken for a ride?                                                                           This now reminds me of a statement which is attributed to Adlai Stevenson, that well-known United States statesman of the early 1960s, who is reported to have invented his own version of the familiar cliché of “power corrupts”, when he said the following in January 1963:  “Power corrupts, but lack of power corrupts  absolutely”.  Mr. Hamad appears to have been “corrupted absolutely” by the lack of power in Zanzibar. He is obviously prepared ‘to go to great lengths’ in order to acquire it. With regard to the multitude of followers who defected to ACT-Wazalendo along with him; if we decide to accept Woodrow Wilson’s ‘doctrine’ of “no worshipping on an empty stomach”; we will quickly find an answer to what motivated his supporters to go along with him.  It must be their (great) expectation of the attractive personal benefits that will accrue to them, in the event of his success in becoming the President of Zanzibar.

An achievable objective, or wishful thinking?

But this could end up being mere wishful thinking, for there are certain known conditions which can facilitate the removal of a ruling party from power; all of which are based on one major factor, which is the loss of popularity among the electorate.  And this loss of popularity is normally the result of the intervention of any of the following three occurrences:-(a) the relevant party’s failure to deliver; or (b) the relevant party’s self-inflicted injuries, (such as nasty scandals, particularly relating to corruption by the people in power); or (c) the presence of an unpopular establishment figure, whose removal galvanizes massive political support. Examples abound around the world, where these factors have played a decisive role in removing ruling parties from power.  We do not have sufficient editorial space in this article to indulge in their discussion. We leave it to the reader to examine, and establish to his complete satisfaction, whether these factors are applicable to Chama cha Mapinduzi, the ruling party in Tanzania.  But I will venture to suggest, that in view of our two Governments’ transparent successes in their delivery performance of goods and services to the people, any talk of “failure to deliver” would probably be taken as no more than a humorous joke.

The purpose of political parties.                            

But still, for those interested political analysts, the Seif Sharrif Hamad event opens up for discussion the bigger questions regarding (a) the purpose of political parties; and (b) the basis for the membership thereof.

 Political parties and their designated purposes.

“We, the people”, have been told, consistently, and repeatedly, that political parties were designed to serve a specific purpose; and also that political parties “are absolutely essential to democracy”.                  

The omnibus purpose of every political party is, of course, to acquire state power. For example, with regard to  Chama cha Mapinduzi (CCM), this objective is manifestly stated in article 5 of its Constitution; while   the notion that political parties  are absolutely essential to democracy is based on the fundamental principle that democracy gives the majority the right to govern, and there is no way of creating such majority without establishing political parties, which can compete for the right to govern by presenting their different policies and programmes to the relevant electorate, and each party trying to persuade that electorate, through organized campaign meetings, to vote for their policy and programme options. Consequently, membership of political parties is generally expected to be based on individual persons being wholly satisfied with the policies and programmes of a given party, and thus being persuaded to join the said party as a member, or to remain a member thereof.

Unfortunately however, what we are witnessing through the frequent defections by our politicians from one political party to another, typically nomadic style; creates a totally different impression, namely that of absolute ‘non-commitment’ to the policies and programmes of any party, and of being driven solely by personal ‘ambition’ to acquire power, or ‘frustration’ at the lack of that possibility in the party from which he defects.

Political parties not deeply rooted in our traditional cultures.

In my humble opinion, there is a strong cultural impediment which prevents our politicians from ‘abiding by the rules of the game’ that govern political parties; namely, the fact that the theory and practice of political parties, is not deeply rooted in our own traditional cultures.                 This is so because the governance system of our traditional rulers, commonly known as   “Chiefs”, was never based on political parties.  And even the British colonial governance system was also not based on political parties; with the British King or Queen being the ruler of the colonized Territory, represented on the ground by a Governor appointed by that ruler. Strategically, that colonial system also fully utilized the traditional Chiefs for their governance purposes, under a strange doctrine known as “indirect rule”.           

Thus, it is only when the British colonialists eventually succumbed to the inevitability of granting independence to their colonial Territories, when they introduced the requirement of political parties. And, in all cases, including Tanzania that imposed requirement is what gave birth to the first ever political parties to be established. Thus, political parties were, in effect, an imported commodity, NOT deeply rooted in the traditional culture of “we the people of this country”.                          

 The fact that  Maalim Hamad was able to transfer together with so many of his CUF political family members, plus so many CUF office properties, easily  confirms  the contention that  his action was truly  ‘nomadisme politique’ , or  ‘nomadic politics’; which is different from the Lowassa style of ‘Domestic political tourism’. 

piomsekwa@gmail.com   /   0754767576.

Source: The Daily News, today and for the courtesy of Cde Msekwa himself