Thursday, 31 January 2008
Wednesday, 30 January 2008
Tuesday, 29 January 2008
"Dream deferred" - Mbeki and Zuma and the arms deal
Author: Mark Gevisser
Pg 675-676
While Thabo Mbeki was strong-arming the South African economy away from state spending and towards fiscal austerity, he presided over a parallel process that did exactly the opposite. From 1996 to 1999, he chaired the cabinet subcommittee on arms procurement that put together and approved the purchase of R30 billion worth of military hardware. The ‘arms deal’, as it became known, eventually cost the South African taxpayer almost double that figure owing to the unstable rand; it also mired the ANC government, at the very moment when it was re-establishing moral rule in South Africa, in an interminable bog of messy corruption scandals and investigations, forcing Mbeki to fire his deputy, Jacob Zuma, in 2005, and implicating Mbeki too in multiple allegations of impropriety.
It has never been suggested, by even his bitterest foes, that Mbeki is personally corrupt. But if the arms deal became the poisoned well of post-apartheid South African politics, then it was Mbeki himself who initially – even if with the best intentions – contaminated the water. He championed the arms deal from the outset, with an ardour quite remarkable in one so skeptical of military expansionism during his own time as a freedom fighter. And as the allegations multiplied, he became increasingly strident in his defence of it.
Pg 675-676
While Thabo Mbeki was strong-arming the South African economy away from state spending and towards fiscal austerity, he presided over a parallel process that did exactly the opposite. From 1996 to 1999, he chaired the cabinet subcommittee on arms procurement that put together and approved the purchase of R30 billion worth of military hardware. The ‘arms deal’, as it became known, eventually cost the South African taxpayer almost double that figure owing to the unstable rand; it also mired the ANC government, at the very moment when it was re-establishing moral rule in South Africa, in an interminable bog of messy corruption scandals and investigations, forcing Mbeki to fire his deputy, Jacob Zuma, in 2005, and implicating Mbeki too in multiple allegations of impropriety.
It has never been suggested, by even his bitterest foes, that Mbeki is personally corrupt. But if the arms deal became the poisoned well of post-apartheid South African politics, then it was Mbeki himself who initially – even if with the best intentions – contaminated the water. He championed the arms deal from the outset, with an ardour quite remarkable in one so skeptical of military expansionism during his own time as a freedom fighter. And as the allegations multiplied, he became increasingly strident in his defence of it.
Monday, 28 January 2008
Commentary (Jaindi Kisero) - Can Annan rescue Raila and Kibaki from the clutches of hardliners?
Ref: http://www.nationmedia.com/eastafrican/current/News/news280120081.htm
Can Annan rescue Raila and Kibaki from the clutches of hardliners?
By JAINDI KISERO
The EastAfrican
A day before the face-to-face meeting between President Mwai Kibaki and the leader of the Orange Democratic Movement, Raila Odinga, the hardliners on Odinga’s side had insisted that there was no need for such a meeting, their argument being that a pre-mediation agreement needed to be signed by both parties first.
That was the position spelt out during the first meeting Odinga and his team held with former secretary general of the United Nations Kofi Annan on Thursday last week.
Indeed, even before Annan arrived in the country, former president Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique, who has been conducting behind-the-scenes negotiations in Kenya under the auspices of the African Peace Forum, had unsuccessfully tried to get the ODM to agree to a face-to-face meeting between the two leaders.
On Thursday last week, there were loud murmurs within sections of the ODM leadership when news spread that Annan had actually managed to persuade Odinga to agree to the face-to-face meeting with Kibaki.
According to our sources, Annan had argued that a meeting between Kibaki and Odinga would not only be an important signal to the country but would also symbolise hope.
Consequently, Annan’s team quickly worked out the terms of engagement for the meeting between Raila and Kibaki.
First, it was agreed that the meeting, which was scheduled to be held at Harambee House in Nairobi’s city centre, would have very few people.
Second, that during the face-to-face meeting, Kibaki and Raila would show each other and agree — in advance — on the contents of the public statements that they would make after the meeting, after having shaken hands before the cameras.
Apparently, things did not go according to Annan’s plans. As the parties prepared to meet, the staff supporting his team were surprised to learn that almost the whole of the Cabinet had been invited to the meeting at Harambee House.
On the ODM side, Odinga turned up accompanied by Pentagon member William Ruto and personal aide Salim Lone.
Our sources told us that neither the Cabinet ministers who flocked to Harambee House nor Ruto were allowed to attend the one-on-one parley. Only Annan joined the duo in the discussions.
What transpired during the one-on-one discussions is still a closely kept secret.
But apparently, Annan’s staffers and the ODM side say that the statement that Kibaki read during the photo opportunity was not the same as the one that had been approved by the mediation team.
Did somebody alter the president’s speech between the short time of the one-on-one meeting with Odinga and Annan and the time they emerged from Harambee House for the photo opportunity?
This remains an open-ended question.
As it is, this mundane issue almost spoilt the party. Hardly an hour after the handshakes between Kibaki and Raila, ODM called a press conference to criticise Kibaki’s assertion that he was the duly elected head of state.
Led by secretary general Anyang Nyong’o, the ODM leaders said Kibaki’s statement had negated the whole rationale for international mediation.
"Mr Mwai Kibaki abused the occasion by attempting to legitimise his usurpation of the presidency. His demeaning and unacceptable behaviour was meant to undermine the mediation and prolong the suffering of the people of Kenya,” said the statement.
Our sources from Annan’s team also told us that he lodged a quiet protest note to Kibaki against his “having been duly elected” remark.
“All issues are on the table including the issue of leadership,” he said in the note.
The lesson for Annan came out loud and clear:
Getting Kibaki and Raila to meet face-to-face was only the easy part. What is emerging is that a very influential constituency on President Kibaki’s side consider the mediation process a mere tactic to buy time — providing the breathing space for a return to the business-as-usual game.
The stakes are very high indeed for them, because they fear that the mediation process will reveal the sins the Electoral Commission of Kenya may have committed and — therefore — expose their culpability in the fiasco.
The standard refrain from this group is that elections can only be challenged in a court of law.
Odinga’s side is not easy to please, either. First, there are hardliners on his side who do not even believe that a power sharing deal is a realistic option. They want Kibaki to step down. Period.
But an even more intractable problem for this group is fear of revenge. In the middle of the post-election violence, criminal elements have taken advantage, burnt people’s houses and displaced hundreds of thousands of members of President Kibaki’s Kikuyu tribe.
Their fear is that if Kibaki is allowed to entrench himself in power, they will face retribution from the administration.
Thus, the more the widespread insecurity environment persists, the better for these merchants of terror.
Thus, the road ahead for Mr Annan will be rough because the two main protagonists are, in a sense, prisoners of two sets of hardliners — making it difficult for them to grant concessions.
What next for Annan? With Kibaki and Odinga having shaken hands in public, next on the Annan team’s agenda will be how to get the parties to sign a pre-mediation agreement defining the terms of engagement.
As we went to press, ODM had sent their version of the agreement to Annan’s team. Our sources within Annan’s team told us that Kibaki’s side were also expected to come through with their terms.
If an agreement is reached on the terms of engagement, the parties will then go directly into
power-sharing negotiations proper.
Our sources told us the ODM document has made several suggestions including a neutral location for the mediation talks, a stop to police killing of demonstrators, a commitment on both sides that the mediation process will be witnessed by several people and a commitment by President Kibaki that he will attend the mediation proceedings either personally or through his representatives.
Is there a middle ground in the conflict and what is either party willing to concede?
On Kibaki’s side, the moderates — especially the business community — have suggested that Odinga’s side be persuaded to take up positions in Kibaki’s Cabinet in a government of national unity.
This is what emerged in discussions with most business lobby groups who have been shuttling between Kibaki and Raila to plead for peace.
And, on Raila’s side, there have emerged groups who are beginning to accept that Kibaki does not have to step down as president.
Their meeting point is a coalition government in which Odinga shares executive powers with the head of state — a compromise between what was stipulated in the Bomas Draft and the Kilifi Drafts during the Constitutional reform debate of 2005.
In public, the players prefer to engage in grandstanding and will not accept that they are ready to share power lest they offend hardliners.
But in reality, several proposals have been presented, with lawyers mandated to come out with schedules of Constitutional changes that may have to be fast-tracked to accommodate any political settlement reached during the mediation process.
When Annan held a meeting with newly elected Speaker of the National Assembly Kenneth Marende, it was to discuss possible scenarios.
How events will unfold in the coming weeks is still difficult to tell. The fear is that if the mediation process drags on for too long, violence especially in the flashpoints in the Rift Valley and elsewhere, may escalate with peasants setting upon one another in retributive slaughter that authorities will find difficult to control.
Can Annan rescue Raila and Kibaki from the clutches of hardliners?
By JAINDI KISERO
The EastAfrican
A day before the face-to-face meeting between President Mwai Kibaki and the leader of the Orange Democratic Movement, Raila Odinga, the hardliners on Odinga’s side had insisted that there was no need for such a meeting, their argument being that a pre-mediation agreement needed to be signed by both parties first.
That was the position spelt out during the first meeting Odinga and his team held with former secretary general of the United Nations Kofi Annan on Thursday last week.
Indeed, even before Annan arrived in the country, former president Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique, who has been conducting behind-the-scenes negotiations in Kenya under the auspices of the African Peace Forum, had unsuccessfully tried to get the ODM to agree to a face-to-face meeting between the two leaders.
On Thursday last week, there were loud murmurs within sections of the ODM leadership when news spread that Annan had actually managed to persuade Odinga to agree to the face-to-face meeting with Kibaki.
According to our sources, Annan had argued that a meeting between Kibaki and Odinga would not only be an important signal to the country but would also symbolise hope.
Consequently, Annan’s team quickly worked out the terms of engagement for the meeting between Raila and Kibaki.
First, it was agreed that the meeting, which was scheduled to be held at Harambee House in Nairobi’s city centre, would have very few people.
Second, that during the face-to-face meeting, Kibaki and Raila would show each other and agree — in advance — on the contents of the public statements that they would make after the meeting, after having shaken hands before the cameras.
Apparently, things did not go according to Annan’s plans. As the parties prepared to meet, the staff supporting his team were surprised to learn that almost the whole of the Cabinet had been invited to the meeting at Harambee House.
On the ODM side, Odinga turned up accompanied by Pentagon member William Ruto and personal aide Salim Lone.
Our sources told us that neither the Cabinet ministers who flocked to Harambee House nor Ruto were allowed to attend the one-on-one parley. Only Annan joined the duo in the discussions.
What transpired during the one-on-one discussions is still a closely kept secret.
But apparently, Annan’s staffers and the ODM side say that the statement that Kibaki read during the photo opportunity was not the same as the one that had been approved by the mediation team.
Did somebody alter the president’s speech between the short time of the one-on-one meeting with Odinga and Annan and the time they emerged from Harambee House for the photo opportunity?
This remains an open-ended question.
As it is, this mundane issue almost spoilt the party. Hardly an hour after the handshakes between Kibaki and Raila, ODM called a press conference to criticise Kibaki’s assertion that he was the duly elected head of state.
Led by secretary general Anyang Nyong’o, the ODM leaders said Kibaki’s statement had negated the whole rationale for international mediation.
"Mr Mwai Kibaki abused the occasion by attempting to legitimise his usurpation of the presidency. His demeaning and unacceptable behaviour was meant to undermine the mediation and prolong the suffering of the people of Kenya,” said the statement.
Our sources from Annan’s team also told us that he lodged a quiet protest note to Kibaki against his “having been duly elected” remark.
“All issues are on the table including the issue of leadership,” he said in the note.
The lesson for Annan came out loud and clear:
Getting Kibaki and Raila to meet face-to-face was only the easy part. What is emerging is that a very influential constituency on President Kibaki’s side consider the mediation process a mere tactic to buy time — providing the breathing space for a return to the business-as-usual game.
The stakes are very high indeed for them, because they fear that the mediation process will reveal the sins the Electoral Commission of Kenya may have committed and — therefore — expose their culpability in the fiasco.
The standard refrain from this group is that elections can only be challenged in a court of law.
Odinga’s side is not easy to please, either. First, there are hardliners on his side who do not even believe that a power sharing deal is a realistic option. They want Kibaki to step down. Period.
But an even more intractable problem for this group is fear of revenge. In the middle of the post-election violence, criminal elements have taken advantage, burnt people’s houses and displaced hundreds of thousands of members of President Kibaki’s Kikuyu tribe.
Their fear is that if Kibaki is allowed to entrench himself in power, they will face retribution from the administration.
Thus, the more the widespread insecurity environment persists, the better for these merchants of terror.
Thus, the road ahead for Mr Annan will be rough because the two main protagonists are, in a sense, prisoners of two sets of hardliners — making it difficult for them to grant concessions.
What next for Annan? With Kibaki and Odinga having shaken hands in public, next on the Annan team’s agenda will be how to get the parties to sign a pre-mediation agreement defining the terms of engagement.
As we went to press, ODM had sent their version of the agreement to Annan’s team. Our sources within Annan’s team told us that Kibaki’s side were also expected to come through with their terms.
If an agreement is reached on the terms of engagement, the parties will then go directly into
power-sharing negotiations proper.
Our sources told us the ODM document has made several suggestions including a neutral location for the mediation talks, a stop to police killing of demonstrators, a commitment on both sides that the mediation process will be witnessed by several people and a commitment by President Kibaki that he will attend the mediation proceedings either personally or through his representatives.
Is there a middle ground in the conflict and what is either party willing to concede?
On Kibaki’s side, the moderates — especially the business community — have suggested that Odinga’s side be persuaded to take up positions in Kibaki’s Cabinet in a government of national unity.
This is what emerged in discussions with most business lobby groups who have been shuttling between Kibaki and Raila to plead for peace.
And, on Raila’s side, there have emerged groups who are beginning to accept that Kibaki does not have to step down as president.
Their meeting point is a coalition government in which Odinga shares executive powers with the head of state — a compromise between what was stipulated in the Bomas Draft and the Kilifi Drafts during the Constitutional reform debate of 2005.
In public, the players prefer to engage in grandstanding and will not accept that they are ready to share power lest they offend hardliners.
But in reality, several proposals have been presented, with lawyers mandated to come out with schedules of Constitutional changes that may have to be fast-tracked to accommodate any political settlement reached during the mediation process.
When Annan held a meeting with newly elected Speaker of the National Assembly Kenneth Marende, it was to discuss possible scenarios.
How events will unfold in the coming weeks is still difficult to tell. The fear is that if the mediation process drags on for too long, violence especially in the flashpoints in the Rift Valley and elsewhere, may escalate with peasants setting upon one another in retributive slaughter that authorities will find difficult to control.
Sunday, 27 January 2008
Saturday, 26 January 2008
Friday, 25 January 2008
Thursday, 24 January 2008
Wednesday, 23 January 2008
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
Commentary by Charles Onyango - Museveni enters Kenya mediation fray as dark horse – on govt side?
Ref: http://www.nationmedia.com/eastafrican/current/News/news210120081.htm
Museveni enters Kenya mediation fray as dark horse – on govt side?
By CHARLES ONYANGO-OBBO
The EastAfrican
Two uneasy questions have occupied minds in East Africa over the past two weeks: One, why was Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni — who is expected to visit Nairobi this Tuesday — the first, and so far only East African leader to congratulate President Mwai Kibaki, even though his victory in the December 27 poll is being disputed by the opposition and has been judged irregular by election observers?
Two, is it really true that Uganda has sent 3,000 soldiers to Western Kenya? It is not impossible, although it is improbable that Museveni has sent soldiers — particularly in such large numbers — to Western Kenya.
Security sources have hinted that Uganda got the nod from Nairobi to send security forces to escort Kampala-bound tankers from places like Kisumu because the Kenyan Police was having to devote most of its resources to dealing with post-election violence, but even Museveni’s critics would be inclined to take accusations of a massive military incursion into Kenya with a pinch of salt.
The question of the Uganda soldiers runs into an immediate practical problem. To bring 3,000 soldiers over Lake Victoria, the Uganda army would require a marine transport capacity that it doesn’t have, has never had, and will not have in the near future.
Agreed, Museveni often makes some terrible political mistakes and has become the typical African Big Man. But he is no fool, nor a man who takes outlandish gambles.
The Uganda government’s main interest in Kenya is a strategic one. It is the country’s main export and import route, its largest trading partner, and its principal source for household industrial goods. Museveni, who has been able to finesse elections and hang on to power longer than any ruler in Uganda’s history, has done so partly because he has managed to maintain decent to sterling economic growth rates.
He won’t do anything to prejudice that by sending troops into Nyanza and Western regions, where Kibaki performed poorly in the election.
The routes into Uganda would be severely disrupted, and the economy would bleed to near-death.
Museveni, a fairly adept strategist, would therefore not get militarily involved in Kenya unless the Uganda army, the UPDF, were able to secure the corridor running from the border to Mombasa, and also control the port.
The other possible goal would be to protect President Kibaki. That is something that he wouldn’t be able to do from Nyanza and Western. The UPDF would have to secure parts of Nairobi for that, and the Kenyan military, with its proud tradition and professionalisation, would not allow that. It would complicate things for Kibaki, not help him.
Mostly, however, the speculation that the Ugandan president has sent troops to Kenya is based on an image of Museveni that is no longer matched by the reality.
Because of his military support for the rebellion by the Rwanda Patriotic Army; his active engagement on the side of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army during the South’s war against Khartoum; his backing for the DR Congo rebels who toppled the dictator Mobutu Sese Seko; and his later occupation of the east of the country, Museveni has been stuck with the image of an African imperialist and expansionist.
Indeed, at the end of 1998, when the UPDF invaded the eastern DRC, the reach of the Uganda army stretched from just outside Juba in Southern Sudan — where it was both supporting the SPLA and fighting the northern Ugandan Lord’s Resistance Army rebels — through the eastern swathe of the DRC up to the border with the Central African Republic.
It was probably the most ambitious deployment ever for an African army, and spread the UPDF over an area more than 1,500 per cent larger than Uganda.
Unsurprisingly, Museveni had bitten off more than he could chew. DR Congo became an international and domestic fiasco, and in two deadly clashes with its former ally for the spoils of occupation in the east of the country, the UPDF suffered its most humiliating military defeats ever at the hands of the Rwanda army.
Overstretched to the point of snapping, and with a snowballing internal political opposition, Museveni had to withdraw his imperial tentacles. Add to that the absence of any glorious prizes to show from many years of foreign military expeditions, Museveni gradually became more inward looking.
The UPDF too changed, becoming something akin to a Praetorian guard to secure his domestic power; and, with the creeping realisation that he couldn’t militarily annihilate the LRA rebels, he agreed to enter into talks with the brutal insurgents.
Also, it is important to remember that small countries like Uganda and Rwanda get their big fix from punching above their weight, and there is nothing that satisfies the spirit of machismo more than being a military superpower beyond your own tiny base.
That is why, in Uganda, the craving for grand gestures is such that many people believe the UPDF is in Nyanza and Western to bring order to Kenya, and that the Presidential Protection Brigade has taken over security at State House and Kibaki’s home in Othaya.
The facts, however, tell us that Museveni has instead been reinventing himself in the opposite direction. In 2005, he pushed through the amendment of the Constitution to remove term limits, and effectively placed himself on the path to becoming president for life.
That damaged his reputation, which then took another beating when he brazenly hijacked the 2006 election.
Turning his image around, and beginning work on fashioning his legacy, therefore became important for the president. Museveni therefore began metamorphosing from a warrior prince into a peacemaker.
While resounding military glory always eluded him, his army has done far better when it is not shooting. Thus it acquitted itself rather well as part of the peacekeeping force in Liberia.
Having seen another “warrior president,” Rwanda’s Paul Kagame, do his international standing immeasurable good by being among the first to send a peacekeeping contingent to Darfur, Museveni offered the UPDF as the lead contingent to the Somalia peacekeeping mission, earning himself international accolades.
This remake was projected on another stage when last November he virtually shut down expenditure on all other government activities to host the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting and the Queen of England in Kampala.
Museveni has rarely looked happier and more satisfied in public than he did during the week of CHOGM.
As Commonwealth chairman, he is unlikely to jeopardise his status with any ill-conceived military involvement in Kenya’s post-election crisis.
Which begs the question, why was he so quick to congratulate Kibaki on being declared winner?
It was vintage Museveni. Museveni would typically calculate that being the only president standing by Kibaki would bring him a larger dividend than if he were just one among 20 leaders doing so.
That doesn’t mean that he comes to Nairobi with the aim of making Kibaki more comfortable in State House. Not at all. There are two issues here.
One is of political character. Because he has been criticised by those who believe that he has been too hasty to take Kibaki’s side, it is imperative for Museveni to show his face in Nairobi. This is because he is a man who doesn’t like to look like he is hiding or running when under attack.
But most important, because he is the only president to congratulate Kibaki, it gives him greater credibility with Nairobi because he is the one leader who is coming into the crisis as a “friend.”
Over the years, Museveni’s actions in the region, and the continent, have become important pointers to US thinking on Africa.
It was he, for example, who played a key role in breaking the standoff between the West and his friend, Libya’s erratic Muammar Gaddafi.
Museveni may thus be the most maligned of all the mediators who have taken a shot at resolving the Kenyan crisis. But it is probably he who will have the best chance of cutting any ice with the Kibaki State House.
Museveni enters Kenya mediation fray as dark horse – on govt side?
By CHARLES ONYANGO-OBBO
The EastAfrican
Two uneasy questions have occupied minds in East Africa over the past two weeks: One, why was Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni — who is expected to visit Nairobi this Tuesday — the first, and so far only East African leader to congratulate President Mwai Kibaki, even though his victory in the December 27 poll is being disputed by the opposition and has been judged irregular by election observers?
Two, is it really true that Uganda has sent 3,000 soldiers to Western Kenya? It is not impossible, although it is improbable that Museveni has sent soldiers — particularly in such large numbers — to Western Kenya.
Security sources have hinted that Uganda got the nod from Nairobi to send security forces to escort Kampala-bound tankers from places like Kisumu because the Kenyan Police was having to devote most of its resources to dealing with post-election violence, but even Museveni’s critics would be inclined to take accusations of a massive military incursion into Kenya with a pinch of salt.
The question of the Uganda soldiers runs into an immediate practical problem. To bring 3,000 soldiers over Lake Victoria, the Uganda army would require a marine transport capacity that it doesn’t have, has never had, and will not have in the near future.
Agreed, Museveni often makes some terrible political mistakes and has become the typical African Big Man. But he is no fool, nor a man who takes outlandish gambles.
The Uganda government’s main interest in Kenya is a strategic one. It is the country’s main export and import route, its largest trading partner, and its principal source for household industrial goods. Museveni, who has been able to finesse elections and hang on to power longer than any ruler in Uganda’s history, has done so partly because he has managed to maintain decent to sterling economic growth rates.
He won’t do anything to prejudice that by sending troops into Nyanza and Western regions, where Kibaki performed poorly in the election.
The routes into Uganda would be severely disrupted, and the economy would bleed to near-death.
Museveni, a fairly adept strategist, would therefore not get militarily involved in Kenya unless the Uganda army, the UPDF, were able to secure the corridor running from the border to Mombasa, and also control the port.
The other possible goal would be to protect President Kibaki. That is something that he wouldn’t be able to do from Nyanza and Western. The UPDF would have to secure parts of Nairobi for that, and the Kenyan military, with its proud tradition and professionalisation, would not allow that. It would complicate things for Kibaki, not help him.
Mostly, however, the speculation that the Ugandan president has sent troops to Kenya is based on an image of Museveni that is no longer matched by the reality.
Because of his military support for the rebellion by the Rwanda Patriotic Army; his active engagement on the side of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army during the South’s war against Khartoum; his backing for the DR Congo rebels who toppled the dictator Mobutu Sese Seko; and his later occupation of the east of the country, Museveni has been stuck with the image of an African imperialist and expansionist.
Indeed, at the end of 1998, when the UPDF invaded the eastern DRC, the reach of the Uganda army stretched from just outside Juba in Southern Sudan — where it was both supporting the SPLA and fighting the northern Ugandan Lord’s Resistance Army rebels — through the eastern swathe of the DRC up to the border with the Central African Republic.
It was probably the most ambitious deployment ever for an African army, and spread the UPDF over an area more than 1,500 per cent larger than Uganda.
Unsurprisingly, Museveni had bitten off more than he could chew. DR Congo became an international and domestic fiasco, and in two deadly clashes with its former ally for the spoils of occupation in the east of the country, the UPDF suffered its most humiliating military defeats ever at the hands of the Rwanda army.
Overstretched to the point of snapping, and with a snowballing internal political opposition, Museveni had to withdraw his imperial tentacles. Add to that the absence of any glorious prizes to show from many years of foreign military expeditions, Museveni gradually became more inward looking.
The UPDF too changed, becoming something akin to a Praetorian guard to secure his domestic power; and, with the creeping realisation that he couldn’t militarily annihilate the LRA rebels, he agreed to enter into talks with the brutal insurgents.
Also, it is important to remember that small countries like Uganda and Rwanda get their big fix from punching above their weight, and there is nothing that satisfies the spirit of machismo more than being a military superpower beyond your own tiny base.
That is why, in Uganda, the craving for grand gestures is such that many people believe the UPDF is in Nyanza and Western to bring order to Kenya, and that the Presidential Protection Brigade has taken over security at State House and Kibaki’s home in Othaya.
The facts, however, tell us that Museveni has instead been reinventing himself in the opposite direction. In 2005, he pushed through the amendment of the Constitution to remove term limits, and effectively placed himself on the path to becoming president for life.
That damaged his reputation, which then took another beating when he brazenly hijacked the 2006 election.
Turning his image around, and beginning work on fashioning his legacy, therefore became important for the president. Museveni therefore began metamorphosing from a warrior prince into a peacemaker.
While resounding military glory always eluded him, his army has done far better when it is not shooting. Thus it acquitted itself rather well as part of the peacekeeping force in Liberia.
Having seen another “warrior president,” Rwanda’s Paul Kagame, do his international standing immeasurable good by being among the first to send a peacekeeping contingent to Darfur, Museveni offered the UPDF as the lead contingent to the Somalia peacekeeping mission, earning himself international accolades.
This remake was projected on another stage when last November he virtually shut down expenditure on all other government activities to host the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting and the Queen of England in Kampala.
Museveni has rarely looked happier and more satisfied in public than he did during the week of CHOGM.
As Commonwealth chairman, he is unlikely to jeopardise his status with any ill-conceived military involvement in Kenya’s post-election crisis.
Which begs the question, why was he so quick to congratulate Kibaki on being declared winner?
It was vintage Museveni. Museveni would typically calculate that being the only president standing by Kibaki would bring him a larger dividend than if he were just one among 20 leaders doing so.
That doesn’t mean that he comes to Nairobi with the aim of making Kibaki more comfortable in State House. Not at all. There are two issues here.
One is of political character. Because he has been criticised by those who believe that he has been too hasty to take Kibaki’s side, it is imperative for Museveni to show his face in Nairobi. This is because he is a man who doesn’t like to look like he is hiding or running when under attack.
But most important, because he is the only president to congratulate Kibaki, it gives him greater credibility with Nairobi because he is the one leader who is coming into the crisis as a “friend.”
Over the years, Museveni’s actions in the region, and the continent, have become important pointers to US thinking on Africa.
It was he, for example, who played a key role in breaking the standoff between the West and his friend, Libya’s erratic Muammar Gaddafi.
Museveni may thus be the most maligned of all the mediators who have taken a shot at resolving the Kenyan crisis. But it is probably he who will have the best chance of cutting any ice with the Kibaki State House.
Commentary by Macharia Gaitho - Politicians on both sides shedding crocodile tears
Ref:http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=115099
Politicians on both sides shedding crocodile tears
Story by MACHARIA GAITHO
Publication Date: 1/22/2008
Politicians never cease to amaze. And disgust at the same time. During the swearing-in of Parliament, those on the Government benches were bust taunting those on the other side as “killers”, obviously in relation to the killings in the Rift Valley and elsewhere that targeted those presumed, by dint of ethnic origin alone, to have voted for President Kibaki and his PNU.
A lot of blood has flowed under the bridge since. Now it is the Government on the spot over the use of excessive force on opposition demonstrators, and the ODM leaders are happy to exploit the situation to the maximum.
Hearing politicians in both sides of the divide, the issue is not that the post-election crisis has resulted in an absolutely unacceptable death toll and the displacement of a quarter million people, but just the opportunity for more political grandstanding.
Nothing could be more hypocritical than a bunch of politicians pretending to grieve over the dead, when they are salivating over the opportunity presented for propaganda points.
LET'S FACE IT. OUR LEADERS DON’T care how many people are felled by police bullets, hacked to death or burnt alive. They can weep their crocodile tears and pretend to be outraged, but for them, every death of a presumed supporter merely presents an occasion to point an accusing finger at the other side.
In my nightmares, I see President Kibaki balancing precariously on a gold and diamond-bedecked throne that is threatening to topple over because it is standing unsteadily on a mountain of decapitated human bodies.
Climbing over the bodies knee-deep in blood with his arm outstretched to grab the throne, I see opposition leader Raila Odinga, still furious that he was denied the biggest prize of all.
We have one stubborn old man determined to hang on to the presidency whatever it takes in blood — not a drop of his, of course. We have an ambitious and equally stubborn younger man who feels strongly that he was rightfully elected president and will likewise do whatever the cost in blood — not a drop of his either — to claim the prize.
The death toll continues to rise. Even as former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan rides into town, we know that he faces a tough task trying to get the claimants to the presidency to see sense.
Short of getting them both in chokehold and banging their heads together, Mr Annan has very little leverage on either President Kibaki and Mr Odinga or their respective entourages of myopic warmongers and sycophants.
The very fact that they have both chosen, so far, to ignore the heart-rending cries of the people they claim the right to rule, preferring brinkmanship to statesmanship, does not fill me with hope.
So, is there anything for Mr Annan to negotiate?
Will President Kibaki admit that his election was flawed and agree to step down or participate in an interim administration pending fresh polls? Will Mr Odinga agree that all there is to back his assertions of a stolen election are unverified claims?
Will President Kibaki see that people thought to have voted for him are being slaughtered and run out of their homes, and the issue will not be resolved except as part of a political settlement?
Will Mr Odinga see that his supporters are suffering an unacceptable death toll at police hands in their protests against the elections?
Will the president accept that the police force is guilty of excessive use of lethal force?
Will the opposition leader see that killing and evictions are not the way to resolve a political dispute?
Will President Kibaki see that he cannot have a comfortable reign as president of a small ethnic section?
Will Mr Odinga see that politics based on isolating and demonising one ethnic group is not the way to claim national leadership?
Will, both the two stubborn claimants to power see that there will be nothing worth ruling if the stalemate continues?
Over to you, Mr Annan.
Politicians on both sides shedding crocodile tears
Story by MACHARIA GAITHO
Publication Date: 1/22/2008
Politicians never cease to amaze. And disgust at the same time. During the swearing-in of Parliament, those on the Government benches were bust taunting those on the other side as “killers”, obviously in relation to the killings in the Rift Valley and elsewhere that targeted those presumed, by dint of ethnic origin alone, to have voted for President Kibaki and his PNU.
A lot of blood has flowed under the bridge since. Now it is the Government on the spot over the use of excessive force on opposition demonstrators, and the ODM leaders are happy to exploit the situation to the maximum.
Hearing politicians in both sides of the divide, the issue is not that the post-election crisis has resulted in an absolutely unacceptable death toll and the displacement of a quarter million people, but just the opportunity for more political grandstanding.
Nothing could be more hypocritical than a bunch of politicians pretending to grieve over the dead, when they are salivating over the opportunity presented for propaganda points.
LET'S FACE IT. OUR LEADERS DON’T care how many people are felled by police bullets, hacked to death or burnt alive. They can weep their crocodile tears and pretend to be outraged, but for them, every death of a presumed supporter merely presents an occasion to point an accusing finger at the other side.
In my nightmares, I see President Kibaki balancing precariously on a gold and diamond-bedecked throne that is threatening to topple over because it is standing unsteadily on a mountain of decapitated human bodies.
Climbing over the bodies knee-deep in blood with his arm outstretched to grab the throne, I see opposition leader Raila Odinga, still furious that he was denied the biggest prize of all.
We have one stubborn old man determined to hang on to the presidency whatever it takes in blood — not a drop of his, of course. We have an ambitious and equally stubborn younger man who feels strongly that he was rightfully elected president and will likewise do whatever the cost in blood — not a drop of his either — to claim the prize.
The death toll continues to rise. Even as former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan rides into town, we know that he faces a tough task trying to get the claimants to the presidency to see sense.
Short of getting them both in chokehold and banging their heads together, Mr Annan has very little leverage on either President Kibaki and Mr Odinga or their respective entourages of myopic warmongers and sycophants.
The very fact that they have both chosen, so far, to ignore the heart-rending cries of the people they claim the right to rule, preferring brinkmanship to statesmanship, does not fill me with hope.
So, is there anything for Mr Annan to negotiate?
Will President Kibaki admit that his election was flawed and agree to step down or participate in an interim administration pending fresh polls? Will Mr Odinga agree that all there is to back his assertions of a stolen election are unverified claims?
Will President Kibaki see that people thought to have voted for him are being slaughtered and run out of their homes, and the issue will not be resolved except as part of a political settlement?
Will Mr Odinga see that his supporters are suffering an unacceptable death toll at police hands in their protests against the elections?
Will the president accept that the police force is guilty of excessive use of lethal force?
Will the opposition leader see that killing and evictions are not the way to resolve a political dispute?
Will President Kibaki see that he cannot have a comfortable reign as president of a small ethnic section?
Will Mr Odinga see that politics based on isolating and demonising one ethnic group is not the way to claim national leadership?
Will, both the two stubborn claimants to power see that there will be nothing worth ruling if the stalemate continues?
Over to you, Mr Annan.
Monday, 21 January 2008
Sunday, 20 January 2008
Sunday nation editorial: Interests of the citizenry must come first
Ref: http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=24&newsid=114962
Interests of the citizenry must come first
Publication Date: 1/20/2008
Experts are still grappling with the daunting task of quantifying the collective damage to the economy over the last three weeks of post-election violence. Hundreds of lives have been lost and property destroyed on a scale never been witnessed in this country since independence.
Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced from their homes and are now living in deplorable conditions in refugee camps in their own country. Thousands more have crossed international borders to seek refuge in neighbouring countries.
Again, we have never had such a huge number of people seeking refuge outside the country.
As a media house, we have been consistent and passionate in calling upon leaders across the political divide to put the interest of the country and citizenry ahead of their political ambitions. We have urged them to come together to save this country from the wasteful conflict that has been gathering momentum since the disputed presidential election results were announced.
As we report elsewhere in this newspaper, our leaders either do not appreciate or seem to grasp the magnitude of the human suffering caused by fighting which is largely assuming ethnic overtones. The result is mass destitution as once thriving rural economies have been wiped out in just three weeks.
The situation on the ground should be enough to jolt political leaders out of their hardline stances and move to quickly resolve their differences that are holding the country to ransom. In addition to the traumatising of large sections of the population–children and women bearing the brunt of it all–the bad blood between communities will require more than a round table conference of the adversaries to resolve. And it is doubtful whether conventional economic methods can conclusively put into figures the losses incurred by farmers and small and medium-sized businesses in the trouble spots across the country. What is evident is that it will take a long time before full recovery is realised.
Rift Valley Province, which has borne the worst of the violence, is a case in point. This extensive region is one the most productive in the country. Our food security is often dependent on it. It produces maize, wheat and other important food crops on a large scale.
Before the elections, fertile farms in areas like Makutano, Mumberes, Timboroa and Burnt Forest held large quantities of unharvested crops. The towns were robust commercial centres where hundreds of people were in gainful employment. Many of the farms have been destroyed and the market centres are deserted.
Thousands of people working on tea plantations and other large farms have lost their jobs and the wherewithal to fend for their families. In turn, these holdings are losing millions of shillings daily in lost production, further complicating the economic situation of the region.
Critical farming resources like tractors and harvesters have been destroyed in the mayhem. The infrastructure that makes the province attractive to both local and international investors is in ruins.
Ordinarily around this time, farmers would be tilling their fields in preparation for the rainy season. However, even for those with the necessary tools, there is the added burden of inflated fuel prices. The implication of all this on the food situation is indeed grave.
Clearly, this province and other strife-torn areas will need vast sums of money to restore their productivity to previous levels. For now, though, the most critical task is the restoration of peace.
Communities at war with each other will need to be brought together by a selfless leadership. This will entail taking a candidly hard look at outstanding grievances like the distribution of resources. This would signal the beginning of a process of trust and the healing the ugly wounds that have been opened by the violence. But all this is unlikely to happen as long as the current political standoff continues.
Interests of the citizenry must come first
Publication Date: 1/20/2008
Experts are still grappling with the daunting task of quantifying the collective damage to the economy over the last three weeks of post-election violence. Hundreds of lives have been lost and property destroyed on a scale never been witnessed in this country since independence.
Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced from their homes and are now living in deplorable conditions in refugee camps in their own country. Thousands more have crossed international borders to seek refuge in neighbouring countries.
Again, we have never had such a huge number of people seeking refuge outside the country.
As a media house, we have been consistent and passionate in calling upon leaders across the political divide to put the interest of the country and citizenry ahead of their political ambitions. We have urged them to come together to save this country from the wasteful conflict that has been gathering momentum since the disputed presidential election results were announced.
As we report elsewhere in this newspaper, our leaders either do not appreciate or seem to grasp the magnitude of the human suffering caused by fighting which is largely assuming ethnic overtones. The result is mass destitution as once thriving rural economies have been wiped out in just three weeks.
The situation on the ground should be enough to jolt political leaders out of their hardline stances and move to quickly resolve their differences that are holding the country to ransom. In addition to the traumatising of large sections of the population–children and women bearing the brunt of it all–the bad blood between communities will require more than a round table conference of the adversaries to resolve. And it is doubtful whether conventional economic methods can conclusively put into figures the losses incurred by farmers and small and medium-sized businesses in the trouble spots across the country. What is evident is that it will take a long time before full recovery is realised.
Rift Valley Province, which has borne the worst of the violence, is a case in point. This extensive region is one the most productive in the country. Our food security is often dependent on it. It produces maize, wheat and other important food crops on a large scale.
Before the elections, fertile farms in areas like Makutano, Mumberes, Timboroa and Burnt Forest held large quantities of unharvested crops. The towns were robust commercial centres where hundreds of people were in gainful employment. Many of the farms have been destroyed and the market centres are deserted.
Thousands of people working on tea plantations and other large farms have lost their jobs and the wherewithal to fend for their families. In turn, these holdings are losing millions of shillings daily in lost production, further complicating the economic situation of the region.
Critical farming resources like tractors and harvesters have been destroyed in the mayhem. The infrastructure that makes the province attractive to both local and international investors is in ruins.
Ordinarily around this time, farmers would be tilling their fields in preparation for the rainy season. However, even for those with the necessary tools, there is the added burden of inflated fuel prices. The implication of all this on the food situation is indeed grave.
Clearly, this province and other strife-torn areas will need vast sums of money to restore their productivity to previous levels. For now, though, the most critical task is the restoration of peace.
Communities at war with each other will need to be brought together by a selfless leadership. This will entail taking a candidly hard look at outstanding grievances like the distribution of resources. This would signal the beginning of a process of trust and the healing the ugly wounds that have been opened by the violence. But all this is unlikely to happen as long as the current political standoff continues.
Commentary by X N Iraki - We’re pawns in political power game
Ref: http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143980644&cid=190
Published on January 20, 2008, 12:00 am
By XN Iraki
By this time, Kenyans should have gone back to their businesses, unencumbered by the power games between Mr Raila Odinga and Mr Mwai Kibaki.
They are power games because both leaders have achieved most of their basic needs in life, getting power and toying with it is their life’s last ambition.
To these politicians, we are pawns in their power game.
None of the two leaders is ready to accept defeat, not because they cannot, but what do they tell their supporters, those who invested money in campaigns and are awaiting dividends?
This power game is not benefiting the country at large, it is eroding confidence in our institutions which will outlive all of us. It is making investors, the job creators, uncertain about their plans. It is discouraging investors from coming here. Soon it will stop talents flowing back with their money and brains.
But more serious, washing our dirty linen in public is offering the international community a golden opportunity to discover our soft underbelly, which they will use in future to further their strategic interests. We also seem not to worry about our children --—who will live with the fallouts from this polls violence and uncertainties.
The good thing about the current state of affairs is that we now know what we think of one another. We now know what peace is, we now know better that within us enemies of peace hide waiting for the right moment.
But we also know that we are ill prepared to solve our self-created crisis, preferring foreign mediators because we distrust our own neighbours and former classmates. Imagine Americans calling a foreigner to mediate between George Bush and Al Gore?
But ominously, from our headlines and pronouncements, it comes clearly how we have institutionalised pessimism. Enough digression, where do we go from here?
First, Raila and his lieutenants decided a legal option is not tenable. The next option is obvious. They believe that the masses are on their side and can sustain protests indefinitely.
The aftermath of the polls violence revealed an exhausted population, since most live on the edge even in times of prosperity and peace. The ODM group also has the media on its side and is determined to convince the international community that it was wronged.
Few can doubt that from referendum onwards, the Government either lost the propaganda war or thinks it’s too decent for that. ODM’s main weapon in this impasse is appealing to our emotions.
Kibaki has the Government and its instruments. He will try and use them within the legal limits. His strategy might be to move on politically, forming the Cabinet, making other strategic appointments, making coalition with like-minded parties, and make ODM see that soon, there might be no goodies remaining.
With the partial Cabinet appointed and key ministries given out, anyone getting into partnership with Kibaki will get leftovers. Kibaki may have another weapon, our national amnesia.
The two gentlemen are institutions by themselves, as persons they can even visit each other in their homes, but behind each are layers of interested parties, who see their presidencies as avenues to new lives.
Elections are not just rituals; in the aftermath, power, prestige and wealth change hands. In Kenya, where poverty is plenty, majority wait for this seismic shift. But in the long run, every political shift creates a new elite, even communism created one.
As time ebbs away, each party fears that political footnotes are not their place in history. But if each can tone down their ego, they may get more pages in our history books and in our national psyche. My belief is that this great nation will endure and future generations will pay tribute to any of us who will make any sacrifice to see peace flow like a river. What is so hard about talking Hon Raila and Hon Kibaki? This crisis is not a picnic, it is costing innocent lives.
Published on January 20, 2008, 12:00 am
By XN Iraki
By this time, Kenyans should have gone back to their businesses, unencumbered by the power games between Mr Raila Odinga and Mr Mwai Kibaki.
They are power games because both leaders have achieved most of their basic needs in life, getting power and toying with it is their life’s last ambition.
To these politicians, we are pawns in their power game.
None of the two leaders is ready to accept defeat, not because they cannot, but what do they tell their supporters, those who invested money in campaigns and are awaiting dividends?
This power game is not benefiting the country at large, it is eroding confidence in our institutions which will outlive all of us. It is making investors, the job creators, uncertain about their plans. It is discouraging investors from coming here. Soon it will stop talents flowing back with their money and brains.
But more serious, washing our dirty linen in public is offering the international community a golden opportunity to discover our soft underbelly, which they will use in future to further their strategic interests. We also seem not to worry about our children --—who will live with the fallouts from this polls violence and uncertainties.
The good thing about the current state of affairs is that we now know what we think of one another. We now know what peace is, we now know better that within us enemies of peace hide waiting for the right moment.
But we also know that we are ill prepared to solve our self-created crisis, preferring foreign mediators because we distrust our own neighbours and former classmates. Imagine Americans calling a foreigner to mediate between George Bush and Al Gore?
But ominously, from our headlines and pronouncements, it comes clearly how we have institutionalised pessimism. Enough digression, where do we go from here?
First, Raila and his lieutenants decided a legal option is not tenable. The next option is obvious. They believe that the masses are on their side and can sustain protests indefinitely.
The aftermath of the polls violence revealed an exhausted population, since most live on the edge even in times of prosperity and peace. The ODM group also has the media on its side and is determined to convince the international community that it was wronged.
Few can doubt that from referendum onwards, the Government either lost the propaganda war or thinks it’s too decent for that. ODM’s main weapon in this impasse is appealing to our emotions.
Kibaki has the Government and its instruments. He will try and use them within the legal limits. His strategy might be to move on politically, forming the Cabinet, making other strategic appointments, making coalition with like-minded parties, and make ODM see that soon, there might be no goodies remaining.
With the partial Cabinet appointed and key ministries given out, anyone getting into partnership with Kibaki will get leftovers. Kibaki may have another weapon, our national amnesia.
The two gentlemen are institutions by themselves, as persons they can even visit each other in their homes, but behind each are layers of interested parties, who see their presidencies as avenues to new lives.
Elections are not just rituals; in the aftermath, power, prestige and wealth change hands. In Kenya, where poverty is plenty, majority wait for this seismic shift. But in the long run, every political shift creates a new elite, even communism created one.
As time ebbs away, each party fears that political footnotes are not their place in history. But if each can tone down their ego, they may get more pages in our history books and in our national psyche. My belief is that this great nation will endure and future generations will pay tribute to any of us who will make any sacrifice to see peace flow like a river. What is so hard about talking Hon Raila and Hon Kibaki? This crisis is not a picnic, it is costing innocent lives.
Saturday, 19 January 2008
Friday, 18 January 2008
Thursday, 17 January 2008
Wednesday, 16 January 2008
Tuesday, 15 January 2008
Monday, 14 January 2008
Sunday, 13 January 2008
Saturday, 12 January 2008
Ngugi laments violence in Kenya
Ref: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7180946.stm
Renowned Kenyan novelist and playwright Ngugi wa Thiong'o tellls BBC World Update his views on the unrest that has engulfed Kenya since last month's disputed elections.
"Writers must sometimes feel like the Greek prophetess Cassandra, gifted to see the future but fated not to be believed.
What is unfolding in Kenya could as well have been lifted from my novel Wizard of the Crow where the ruling party and the opposition parities engaged in Western-sponsored democracy become mirror images of one another in their absurdity and indifference to the poor.
The picture of men and women burnt down in a church where they had gone for refuge still haunts my mind. A child running away from the fire was caught and hurled back into the flames.
One of the few survivors was quoted as saying: "But they knew me; we were neighbours. I thought Peter was a friend - a good neighbour. How could Peter do this to me?
I had heard the same puzzled cry from Bosnia. I had heard the same cry from Iraq. I had heard the same, same words from Rwanda: "We were neighbours; we'd married into each other. How could this happen?"
And now I hear the same cry from Eldoret North in my beloved Kenya. For me this burning of men, women and children in a church is a defining single instant of the current political impasse in Kenya.
And this must be separated from accusations and counter-accusations of rigged elections by the contending parties.
Rigged elections is one thing - it can be righted by any mutually agreed political measures - but ethnic cleansing is another matter altogether.
What is disturbing is that this instant seems to have been part of a co-ordinated programme with similar acts occurring in several other places at about the same time against ordinary members of the same community.
Ordinary people do not wake up one morning and suddenly decide to kill their neighbours.
Ethnic cleansing is often instigated by the political elite of one community against another community. It is premeditated - often an order from political warlords.
Or it may be the outcome of an elitist ideology of demonising and isolating another community.
Either way the aim is to drive members of the targeted community from the region.
Premeditated
Frantz Fanon, the intellectual visionary of the Third World, had long ago warned us of the dangers of the ideology of regionalism preached by an elite whose money can buy them safe residence in any part of a country.
A single instance of premeditated ethnic cleansing can lead to an unstoppable cycle of vendettas - a poor-on-poor violence - while those who tele-guided them to war through the ideology of hate and demonisation are clinking glasses in middle-class peace at cocktail parties with the elite or the supposed enemy community.
This crime should be investigated by the United Nations.
If it is found that a political organisation has run a campaign on a programme that consciously seeks to isolate another community as a community, then they ought to be held fully accountable for the consequences of their ideology and actions.
It is often easier to blame a government when it is involved in massacres. This is as it should be.
A government must always be held to higher standards, for its very legitimacy lies in its capacity to ensure peace and security for all communities.
But what about if such a massacre is inspired by a programme of an opposition movement?
This ought to receive equally severe condemnation from all and sundry, for being in opposition does not give an organisation the right to run on an ideology of isolation and hate targeted at another community.
An opposition movement is potentially a government of tomorrow. A programme that such a political organisation draws while in opposition would obviously be the programme they'll try to implement when in power.
That's why such acts must be condemned even when they are clothed in progressive, democratic-sounding words and phrases.
I therefore call upon the United Nations to act and investigate the massacres in Kenya as crimes against humanity and let the chips fall where they may.
For the sake of justice, healing and peace now and in the future I urge all progressive forces not to be so engrossed with the political wrongs of election tampering that they forget the crimes of hate and ethnic cleansing - crimes that have led to untimely deaths and the displacement of thousands.
The world does not need another Bosnia; Africa certainly does not need another Rwanda."
Renowned Kenyan novelist and playwright Ngugi wa Thiong'o tellls BBC World Update his views on the unrest that has engulfed Kenya since last month's disputed elections.
"Writers must sometimes feel like the Greek prophetess Cassandra, gifted to see the future but fated not to be believed.
What is unfolding in Kenya could as well have been lifted from my novel Wizard of the Crow where the ruling party and the opposition parities engaged in Western-sponsored democracy become mirror images of one another in their absurdity and indifference to the poor.
The picture of men and women burnt down in a church where they had gone for refuge still haunts my mind. A child running away from the fire was caught and hurled back into the flames.
One of the few survivors was quoted as saying: "But they knew me; we were neighbours. I thought Peter was a friend - a good neighbour. How could Peter do this to me?
I had heard the same puzzled cry from Bosnia. I had heard the same cry from Iraq. I had heard the same, same words from Rwanda: "We were neighbours; we'd married into each other. How could this happen?"
And now I hear the same cry from Eldoret North in my beloved Kenya. For me this burning of men, women and children in a church is a defining single instant of the current political impasse in Kenya.
And this must be separated from accusations and counter-accusations of rigged elections by the contending parties.
Rigged elections is one thing - it can be righted by any mutually agreed political measures - but ethnic cleansing is another matter altogether.
What is disturbing is that this instant seems to have been part of a co-ordinated programme with similar acts occurring in several other places at about the same time against ordinary members of the same community.
Ordinary people do not wake up one morning and suddenly decide to kill their neighbours.
Ethnic cleansing is often instigated by the political elite of one community against another community. It is premeditated - often an order from political warlords.
Or it may be the outcome of an elitist ideology of demonising and isolating another community.
Either way the aim is to drive members of the targeted community from the region.
Premeditated
Frantz Fanon, the intellectual visionary of the Third World, had long ago warned us of the dangers of the ideology of regionalism preached by an elite whose money can buy them safe residence in any part of a country.
A single instance of premeditated ethnic cleansing can lead to an unstoppable cycle of vendettas - a poor-on-poor violence - while those who tele-guided them to war through the ideology of hate and demonisation are clinking glasses in middle-class peace at cocktail parties with the elite or the supposed enemy community.
This crime should be investigated by the United Nations.
If it is found that a political organisation has run a campaign on a programme that consciously seeks to isolate another community as a community, then they ought to be held fully accountable for the consequences of their ideology and actions.
It is often easier to blame a government when it is involved in massacres. This is as it should be.
A government must always be held to higher standards, for its very legitimacy lies in its capacity to ensure peace and security for all communities.
But what about if such a massacre is inspired by a programme of an opposition movement?
This ought to receive equally severe condemnation from all and sundry, for being in opposition does not give an organisation the right to run on an ideology of isolation and hate targeted at another community.
An opposition movement is potentially a government of tomorrow. A programme that such a political organisation draws while in opposition would obviously be the programme they'll try to implement when in power.
That's why such acts must be condemned even when they are clothed in progressive, democratic-sounding words and phrases.
I therefore call upon the United Nations to act and investigate the massacres in Kenya as crimes against humanity and let the chips fall where they may.
For the sake of justice, healing and peace now and in the future I urge all progressive forces not to be so engrossed with the political wrongs of election tampering that they forget the crimes of hate and ethnic cleansing - crimes that have led to untimely deaths and the displacement of thousands.
The world does not need another Bosnia; Africa certainly does not need another Rwanda."
Friday, 11 January 2008
Thursday, 10 January 2008
Wednesday, 09 January 2008
Tuesday, 08 January 2008
Monday, 07 January 2008
Macharia Gaitho states - It’s business as usual for the rich as the poor kill each other
Ref: http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=114132
It’s business as usual for the rich as the poor kill each other
Story by MACHARIA GAITHO
Publication Date: 1/8/2008
I have been frequenting my local despite all the post-election chaos around.
Even when violence had reached crazy levels in the slums, not too far away, I found life pretty much normal.
At the shopping centre, typical of middle-class Nairobi, the beer was flowing, everybody was catching up with the news on TV, when not watching English soccer, and the car-wash and the outdoor roasts were doing their thing.
In the pubs, politics was of course the main conversation. While some may have a liking for specific joints, everything is pretty much multi-tribal. The barrel I sit around could be shared by a Kikuyu, a Kamba, a Luo, a Kalenjin, a Somali, a Maasai or any other person that makes it a microcosm of Kenya.
AND BETWEEN THE BEER AND THE banter, there is absolutely no tribal animosity even as the TV brings up images of ethnic violence hitting the poor all over the country, while their wealthy leaders fight by proxy over the spoils.
Even the jokes have been updated. In the early days of the vote count, the one about one Peter Marangi, hired by Mrs Ida Odinga, stocking up on gallons of orange paint was all the rage. And there was First Lady Lucy Kibaki getting packing and removals company, Othaya Express, in readiness for departure from State House.
By last weekend, Peter Marangi was desperately trying to exchange his orange paint for blue paint. Ida Odinga was stuck with rolls and rolls of orange curtain material. Othaya Express was demanding more money from Mrs Kibaki for unpacking and putting everything back in its place.
And life went on. Surreal? Bizarre?
Certainly, Kenya may be burning, on the brink of ethnic warfare and total breakdown, and yet the middle and upper classes carry on as before in the cloistered confines of secure estates, private clubs, gated compounds, razor wire and electric fencing.
Fools paradise, probably, and even more as we start to celebrate what we think is a return to normalcy.
The fact is that the artificial peace and tranquillity we have always taken for granted, has forever been shattered.
IN THE RIFT VALLEY, THE GENIE OF violence, uncorked in the early 1990s as the Moi regime sought desperately to halt the march of democracy, has never been stilled. It is always there, lurking below the surface, and ready to boil over at a moment’s notice.
Some elements, now in the Kibaki regime, might have created the Mungiki as a Kikuyu counterweight to the Moi era Kalenjin warriors in the Rift Valley (Such is a time we must cease this nonsense of a ‘certain community’ and say it as is it).
The problem is that such forces, once created, often take on a life of their own. We have witnessed after the elections an ethnic violence in the Rift Valley that could recur again and again unless the underlying grievances are properly and comprehensively addressed.
Some in the ODM initially welcomed the violence as the anti-dote to Kikuyu arrogance, until they realised it was directed by forces in their midst they had no comprehension of.
Then there was the urban violence, particularly in Nairobi, where the dreaded gang, Mungiki, was mentioned as the one leading the Kikuyu troops against their presumed enemies from the Luo and other communities.
If the Kalenjin warriors were an unofficial army of the previous government, then one wonders whether the Mungiki are playing a similar roles in this government.
One picture missed in all this is that it is the poor fighting the poor, the poor killing the poor, the poor burning the houses for the poor, the poor raping the poor, the poor decapitating the poor.
The poor are waging war against their fellow poor on behalf of the wealthy, who despite ethnic differences and party affiliations, are drinking together, sleeping together, pulling business deals together, partying together and playing golf together.
SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN THE poor realise they are nothing more than pawns and cannon fodder on the giant chessboard or monopoly set by which the rich and wealthy amuse themselves?
That will be the time when Kenya will be ripe for revolution. Here it will not be the revolution that sweeps President Kibaki out of State House and installs Raila Odinga. Not at all. It will be the revolution that dumps both members of the political elite into the dustbin.
Of course experience shows that revolutions in Africa often bring chaos rather than order and a re-making of society.
Perhaps the trauma of the past week or so will force us all to take a long hard look. The solution is not in the rival elites entering into coalition or sharing power. It is in comprehensive reshaping of society.
It’s business as usual for the rich as the poor kill each other
Story by MACHARIA GAITHO
Publication Date: 1/8/2008
I have been frequenting my local despite all the post-election chaos around.
Even when violence had reached crazy levels in the slums, not too far away, I found life pretty much normal.
At the shopping centre, typical of middle-class Nairobi, the beer was flowing, everybody was catching up with the news on TV, when not watching English soccer, and the car-wash and the outdoor roasts were doing their thing.
In the pubs, politics was of course the main conversation. While some may have a liking for specific joints, everything is pretty much multi-tribal. The barrel I sit around could be shared by a Kikuyu, a Kamba, a Luo, a Kalenjin, a Somali, a Maasai or any other person that makes it a microcosm of Kenya.
AND BETWEEN THE BEER AND THE banter, there is absolutely no tribal animosity even as the TV brings up images of ethnic violence hitting the poor all over the country, while their wealthy leaders fight by proxy over the spoils.
Even the jokes have been updated. In the early days of the vote count, the one about one Peter Marangi, hired by Mrs Ida Odinga, stocking up on gallons of orange paint was all the rage. And there was First Lady Lucy Kibaki getting packing and removals company, Othaya Express, in readiness for departure from State House.
By last weekend, Peter Marangi was desperately trying to exchange his orange paint for blue paint. Ida Odinga was stuck with rolls and rolls of orange curtain material. Othaya Express was demanding more money from Mrs Kibaki for unpacking and putting everything back in its place.
And life went on. Surreal? Bizarre?
Certainly, Kenya may be burning, on the brink of ethnic warfare and total breakdown, and yet the middle and upper classes carry on as before in the cloistered confines of secure estates, private clubs, gated compounds, razor wire and electric fencing.
Fools paradise, probably, and even more as we start to celebrate what we think is a return to normalcy.
The fact is that the artificial peace and tranquillity we have always taken for granted, has forever been shattered.
IN THE RIFT VALLEY, THE GENIE OF violence, uncorked in the early 1990s as the Moi regime sought desperately to halt the march of democracy, has never been stilled. It is always there, lurking below the surface, and ready to boil over at a moment’s notice.
Some elements, now in the Kibaki regime, might have created the Mungiki as a Kikuyu counterweight to the Moi era Kalenjin warriors in the Rift Valley (Such is a time we must cease this nonsense of a ‘certain community’ and say it as is it).
The problem is that such forces, once created, often take on a life of their own. We have witnessed after the elections an ethnic violence in the Rift Valley that could recur again and again unless the underlying grievances are properly and comprehensively addressed.
Some in the ODM initially welcomed the violence as the anti-dote to Kikuyu arrogance, until they realised it was directed by forces in their midst they had no comprehension of.
Then there was the urban violence, particularly in Nairobi, where the dreaded gang, Mungiki, was mentioned as the one leading the Kikuyu troops against their presumed enemies from the Luo and other communities.
If the Kalenjin warriors were an unofficial army of the previous government, then one wonders whether the Mungiki are playing a similar roles in this government.
One picture missed in all this is that it is the poor fighting the poor, the poor killing the poor, the poor burning the houses for the poor, the poor raping the poor, the poor decapitating the poor.
The poor are waging war against their fellow poor on behalf of the wealthy, who despite ethnic differences and party affiliations, are drinking together, sleeping together, pulling business deals together, partying together and playing golf together.
SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN THE poor realise they are nothing more than pawns and cannon fodder on the giant chessboard or monopoly set by which the rich and wealthy amuse themselves?
That will be the time when Kenya will be ripe for revolution. Here it will not be the revolution that sweeps President Kibaki out of State House and installs Raila Odinga. Not at all. It will be the revolution that dumps both members of the political elite into the dustbin.
Of course experience shows that revolutions in Africa often bring chaos rather than order and a re-making of society.
Perhaps the trauma of the past week or so will force us all to take a long hard look. The solution is not in the rival elites entering into coalition or sharing power. It is in comprehensive reshaping of society.
Prof. Ali Mazrui suggests possible options to end the impasse
Ref: http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143980051&cid=4
By David Ohito
Renowned scholar, Prof Ali Mazrui, proposes a fresh presidential poll supervised by international organisations or power sharing to resolve the leadership stalemate.
He said Presidential elections were a major setback to stability and democratisation, which had to be resolved to salvage Kenya from becoming a failed State.
"A possible solution would be for the African Union to appoint an independent commission of inquiry into the management of the presidential election, and make recommendations," Mazrui said in a press statement sent to The Standard.
"One possible recommendation would conceivably be to accept the parliamentary results, which had, by most estimates, been transparent and credible. But there might be new internationally supervised presidential elections with the three main candidates on the ballot," Mazrui said.
He proposed solutions Kenya should embrace in search of peace, including a recount of votes.
"It is imperative for President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga to enter into urgent negotiations to find a solution to this painful impasse, and to help the process of national healing," he said.
Mazrui proposed revising the Constitution to allow for the creation of a prime minister’s post.
"The third option is probably the easiest to accomplish. The new Parliament should be sworn in and called into session. Its first task should be to consider a constitutional amendment creating the post of prime minister answerable to Parliament and not to the Chief Executive (the President). If the constitutional amendment is passed, Parliament would then vote for the first prime minister," he said.
He added: "Considering the balance of political parties voted into parliament, the new prime minister is almost bound to be Raila."
"Kenya would borrow from the French model, with both an executive President accountable directly to the people and an executive prime minister accountable to the people’s legislative representatives - Parliament," he noted.
He said as is the case in France, the President and the prime minister would have to find ways of working together in the interest of the people.
By David Ohito
Renowned scholar, Prof Ali Mazrui, proposes a fresh presidential poll supervised by international organisations or power sharing to resolve the leadership stalemate.
He said Presidential elections were a major setback to stability and democratisation, which had to be resolved to salvage Kenya from becoming a failed State.
"A possible solution would be for the African Union to appoint an independent commission of inquiry into the management of the presidential election, and make recommendations," Mazrui said in a press statement sent to The Standard.
"One possible recommendation would conceivably be to accept the parliamentary results, which had, by most estimates, been transparent and credible. But there might be new internationally supervised presidential elections with the three main candidates on the ballot," Mazrui said.
He proposed solutions Kenya should embrace in search of peace, including a recount of votes.
"It is imperative for President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga to enter into urgent negotiations to find a solution to this painful impasse, and to help the process of national healing," he said.
Mazrui proposed revising the Constitution to allow for the creation of a prime minister’s post.
"The third option is probably the easiest to accomplish. The new Parliament should be sworn in and called into session. Its first task should be to consider a constitutional amendment creating the post of prime minister answerable to Parliament and not to the Chief Executive (the President). If the constitutional amendment is passed, Parliament would then vote for the first prime minister," he said.
He added: "Considering the balance of political parties voted into parliament, the new prime minister is almost bound to be Raila."
"Kenya would borrow from the French model, with both an executive President accountable directly to the people and an executive prime minister accountable to the people’s legislative representatives - Parliament," he noted.
He said as is the case in France, the President and the prime minister would have to find ways of working together in the interest of the people.
Joint statement by a cross sections of civil society groupings in Kenya
Kenyans For Peace, Truth, Justice
We speak in the name of Kenya's governance, human rights and legal organizations, as well as the concerned citizens who have contacted and chosen to work with us over the last week.
We strongly condemn the violence that has erupted across the country following the questionable outcomes of the counting and tallying done under the electoral process. We express our deepest sympathy to all those who have been injured, raped or killed, those who have lost property, those who have been internally displaced as well as those who continue to live in fear. We are only too acutely aware that the survivors and victims continue to be those with the most to lose from the violence as well as those who least deserve to experience it—Kenya's impoverished women and men in both low-income urban areas as well as in rural areas.
We are aware that the violence experienced has taken three primary forms. First, disorganized protest at the supposed results of the presidential tally. Second, instigated and organized militia activity particularly in the Rift Valley, but also through the re-activation of Mungiki in Central and Nairobi and, now,Chinkororo in Nyanza. And third, extraordinary use of force by Kenya's Police Force and General Service Unit to the extent of extrajudicial executions violating the most fundamental of freedoms and human rights—the rights to life and the safety and security of persons. We strongly condemn all three forms.
We note that the violence experienced is being used to legitimize the curtailing of the most basic of freedoms and human rights—the freedoms of expression, assembly and association. These freedoms and human rights are guaranteed by international law, regional law and our own Constitution. They must be upheld at all times—especially as the exercise of these freedoms and human rights is the only way for Kenyans to legally and legitimately express their protest at the alleged presidential outcome of the electoral process. We believe that the repression and suppression of legal and legitimate forms of protest can only perpetuate further violence.
It is also clear to us that, at the heart of the violence now being experienced, is a violation of other fundamental freedoms and rights directly related to the electoral processes. It is clear that the electoral anomalies and malpractices experienced during the counting and tallying of our electoral process were so grave as to alter its outcomes. Some of those electoral anomalies and malpractices were, in addition, illegal—thus rendering the supposed presidential outcome not only illegitimate but also illegal. We therefore consider Mwai Kibaki to be in office still on his first term.
Our hope lies in Kenyans standing up against the travesty that has been made of the electoral process. Our hope lies in Kenyans who have, at great personal risk, and without regard to ethnicity, on principle provided security, shelter and safe passage to those Kenyans targeted by the militia activity in the Rift Valley and elsewhere. We note the domestic humanitarian efforts coordinated by the National Council of Churches of Kenya with statistical support from the Catholic Relief Services—efforts to which many individual Kenyans and Kenyan businesses have now associated themselves. We note too the domestic peace initiatives being worked on by Amani Focus, the 'Ibrahim group' (including Ambassador Kiplagat and General Sumbweiyo) and Peacenet. And we now invite other concerned citizens to join the 'peace through truth and justice' efforts being carried out by domestic governance, human rights and legal organizations.
In particular, we would like to call on:
1. All efforts and initiatives to consistently stress that peace cannot and will not be achieved without electoral truth and justice;
2. All Kenyans to stand up to be counted not just for peace but also for electoral truth and justice;
3. The state to respect and uphold the rights to the freedoms of expression, assembly and association so as to ensure Kenyans protest only legally, legitimately and non-violently;
4. All politicians and political parties to immediately desist from the re-activation, support and use of militia organizations such as those active in the Rift Valley, Mungiki and Chinkororo;
5. The Ministry of Internal Security, the Police Force and the General Service Unit to exercise their duties within the boundaries of the Constitution and the law and desist from any extraordinary use of force and, in particular, extrajudicial executions;
6. The Electoral Commission of Kenya to immediately resign for having participated in and condoned a presidential electoral process so flawed as to result in our nation's current crisis;
7. African states and the rest of the international community to pressurize for mediation between the Party of National Unity and the Orange Democratic Movement on addressing the electoral travesty that has occurred;
8. The mediation process to, as its first priority, agree upon an interim electoral oversight body to conduct a forensic audit into the polling, counting and tallying process with a view to recommending, depending on its findings, a re-count, a re-tallying or a re-run within a specified time period;
9. African states and the rest of the international community to, in the interim, deny official recognition to the man sworn in as President;
10. African states and the rest of the international community to immediately revoke any and all visas for any and all of the PNU's and ODM's leadership—as well as all of their immediate family members—to ensure they remain in this country to resolve the electoral travesty that has occurred;
11. The man sworn in as President to desist from announcing a Cabinet and otherwise aggravating and inflaming the current violence.
Signed:
Africa Centre for Open Governance (AfriCOG)
Awaaz
Centre for Law and Research International (CLARION)
Centre for Multiparty Democracy (CMD)
Centre for Rights, Education and Awareness for Women (CREAW)
(CRADLE)
Constitution and Reform Education Consortium (CRECO)
East African Law Society (EALS)
Haki Focus
Hema la Katiba
Independent Medico-Legal Unit (IMLU)
Innovative Lawyering
Institute for Education in Democracy (IED)
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ-Kenya)
Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC)
Kenya Leadership Institute (KLI)
Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR)
Kituo cha Sheria
Media Institute
Muslim Human Rights Forum
National Constitution Executive Council (NCEC)
Society for International Development (SID)
Urgent Action Fund (UAF)-Africa
Youth Agenda
We speak in the name of Kenya's governance, human rights and legal organizations, as well as the concerned citizens who have contacted and chosen to work with us over the last week.
We strongly condemn the violence that has erupted across the country following the questionable outcomes of the counting and tallying done under the electoral process. We express our deepest sympathy to all those who have been injured, raped or killed, those who have lost property, those who have been internally displaced as well as those who continue to live in fear. We are only too acutely aware that the survivors and victims continue to be those with the most to lose from the violence as well as those who least deserve to experience it—Kenya's impoverished women and men in both low-income urban areas as well as in rural areas.
We are aware that the violence experienced has taken three primary forms. First, disorganized protest at the supposed results of the presidential tally. Second, instigated and organized militia activity particularly in the Rift Valley, but also through the re-activation of Mungiki in Central and Nairobi and, now,Chinkororo in Nyanza. And third, extraordinary use of force by Kenya's Police Force and General Service Unit to the extent of extrajudicial executions violating the most fundamental of freedoms and human rights—the rights to life and the safety and security of persons. We strongly condemn all three forms.
We note that the violence experienced is being used to legitimize the curtailing of the most basic of freedoms and human rights—the freedoms of expression, assembly and association. These freedoms and human rights are guaranteed by international law, regional law and our own Constitution. They must be upheld at all times—especially as the exercise of these freedoms and human rights is the only way for Kenyans to legally and legitimately express their protest at the alleged presidential outcome of the electoral process. We believe that the repression and suppression of legal and legitimate forms of protest can only perpetuate further violence.
It is also clear to us that, at the heart of the violence now being experienced, is a violation of other fundamental freedoms and rights directly related to the electoral processes. It is clear that the electoral anomalies and malpractices experienced during the counting and tallying of our electoral process were so grave as to alter its outcomes. Some of those electoral anomalies and malpractices were, in addition, illegal—thus rendering the supposed presidential outcome not only illegitimate but also illegal. We therefore consider Mwai Kibaki to be in office still on his first term.
Our hope lies in Kenyans standing up against the travesty that has been made of the electoral process. Our hope lies in Kenyans who have, at great personal risk, and without regard to ethnicity, on principle provided security, shelter and safe passage to those Kenyans targeted by the militia activity in the Rift Valley and elsewhere. We note the domestic humanitarian efforts coordinated by the National Council of Churches of Kenya with statistical support from the Catholic Relief Services—efforts to which many individual Kenyans and Kenyan businesses have now associated themselves. We note too the domestic peace initiatives being worked on by Amani Focus, the 'Ibrahim group' (including Ambassador Kiplagat and General Sumbweiyo) and Peacenet. And we now invite other concerned citizens to join the 'peace through truth and justice' efforts being carried out by domestic governance, human rights and legal organizations.
In particular, we would like to call on:
1. All efforts and initiatives to consistently stress that peace cannot and will not be achieved without electoral truth and justice;
2. All Kenyans to stand up to be counted not just for peace but also for electoral truth and justice;
3. The state to respect and uphold the rights to the freedoms of expression, assembly and association so as to ensure Kenyans protest only legally, legitimately and non-violently;
4. All politicians and political parties to immediately desist from the re-activation, support and use of militia organizations such as those active in the Rift Valley, Mungiki and Chinkororo;
5. The Ministry of Internal Security, the Police Force and the General Service Unit to exercise their duties within the boundaries of the Constitution and the law and desist from any extraordinary use of force and, in particular, extrajudicial executions;
6. The Electoral Commission of Kenya to immediately resign for having participated in and condoned a presidential electoral process so flawed as to result in our nation's current crisis;
7. African states and the rest of the international community to pressurize for mediation between the Party of National Unity and the Orange Democratic Movement on addressing the electoral travesty that has occurred;
8. The mediation process to, as its first priority, agree upon an interim electoral oversight body to conduct a forensic audit into the polling, counting and tallying process with a view to recommending, depending on its findings, a re-count, a re-tallying or a re-run within a specified time period;
9. African states and the rest of the international community to, in the interim, deny official recognition to the man sworn in as President;
10. African states and the rest of the international community to immediately revoke any and all visas for any and all of the PNU's and ODM's leadership—as well as all of their immediate family members—to ensure they remain in this country to resolve the electoral travesty that has occurred;
11. The man sworn in as President to desist from announcing a Cabinet and otherwise aggravating and inflaming the current violence.
Signed:
Africa Centre for Open Governance (AfriCOG)
Awaaz
Centre for Law and Research International (CLARION)
Centre for Multiparty Democracy (CMD)
Centre for Rights, Education and Awareness for Women (CREAW)
(CRADLE)
Constitution and Reform Education Consortium (CRECO)
East African Law Society (EALS)
Haki Focus
Hema la Katiba
Independent Medico-Legal Unit (IMLU)
Innovative Lawyering
Institute for Education in Democracy (IED)
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ-Kenya)
Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC)
Kenya Leadership Institute (KLI)
Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR)
Kituo cha Sheria
Media Institute
Muslim Human Rights Forum
National Constitution Executive Council (NCEC)
Society for International Development (SID)
Urgent Action Fund (UAF)-Africa
Youth Agenda
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)