It seems Africans in the Diaspora generally and Nigerians in particular have reached a saturation point where any public event which features high profile African guests or speakers especially public office holders, is regarded with a “so what”, “what’s new” and “haven’t we heard it all before” attitude. This much was somewhat palpable in the atmosphere at the Eirenicon-Africa Lecture on 27^th March 2012 titled “Neither the Washington nor the Beijing Consensus: A New Developmental Paradigm to fit African Realities and Cultures” which, as the title implies, was meant to discuss the way forward for Africa in terms of economic and socio-political development. One can hardly blame those who take this cynical stand point though, given that a number of African policy makers only tend to put on their thinking caps at such public events and put them away once the event is done as they resume “business-as-usual”. However, this event — one of a series of lectures organized by Eirenicon-Africa, a league of established young forward-thinking Africans — and the themes of the discussions focusing on home-grown solutions arguably signal a gradual change from the norm.

Distinguished Speakers/Guests:

Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor was the keynote speaker, a fancy term denoting that Sanusi did most of the talking for the duration of the event. Sanusi is a man famous not only for his radical banking reforms, but increasingly for his exceptional oratorical skills because, as the moderator of the gathering accurately described, “…whatever he says is always fascinating”.  The two respondents at the Lecture were Ambassador Tesfamicael Gerahtu, the Eritrean Ambassador to the UK and Ireland who exuded tremendous passion and nationalistic fervour for his country – though many an Eritrean activist in the audience held different opinions – and Professor Paul Collier, the distinguished Professor of Economics and Director of the Centre for the Study of African Economies at Oxford University who became (in)famous amongst Nigerians in January this year, for an article he wrote in which he used unsavoury terms to strongly condemn the nation-wide protests against the removal of fuel subsidies in Nigeria. The moderator was China Danforth Onyemelukwe, Managing Director responsible for Africa coverage at Goldman Sachs in London. Each of the speakers took turns outlining what they perceived to be the challenges inhibiting Africa’s development and how they felt Africa could unclasp those fetters.

Challenges Inhibiting African Development:

Mallam Sanusi

All three guests seemed to have a problem with the title of the event especially the reference to development models: the Washington and the Beijing Consensus. The CBN governor Sanusi for instance stated that there is nothing like the Beijing Consensus because the Chinese “didn’t go round begging people to adopt their own model” as was the case with the Washington Consensus. Ambassador Gerhatu underscored his aversion to such development models which he regards as “myths rather than reality” because they do not sufficiently capture the diversity in Africa and even within a country like China which he states “doesn’t have one single economic system, but has a diverse system”. Collier was in agreement with Gerhatu’s assessment that development is based on internal dynamics which vary from country to country and little to do with models and ideologies.

Sanusi speaking with an economist’s slant pointed to the “structurally deformed” economies in many African countries, with particular reference to Nigeria, and the problem of “value linkages” as the fetters to development. He refers to the Nigerian economy as that which “imports everything we produce and export what we don’t produce… even democracy” referring to how the Nigerian Military government under late General Abacha conducted free and fair elections in Liberia. He added that in Nigeria “we literally consume our GDP” and goes on to cite examples of how Nigerians consume meat from cattle (beef) along with the skin (kpomo, a delicacy), rather than using hides and skins to produce leather. He further stated that no country in the world developed from exporting primary commodities such as crude oil, mineral resources or cash crops — despite the prospects of earning foreign exchange — but that development comes from building the economy and from industrialization.

Sanusi attributed this structural deformity of African economies to both internal and external factors. Internally, he blames the rentier status of resource-rich countries like Nigeria and the attendant rent-seeking behaviour of the society and the political elite in particular, which is “not productive like primitive accumulation” as the acquired wealth is squandered. External factors he cited include the difficult uncompetitive position of many African economies in the global economy, aggravated by Washington Consensus policies driven by the US, World Bank and IMF to liberalize trade (free trade), take huge loans, remove subsidies etc. Interestingly, Sanusi noted the unfair prescription by the Washington Consensus policies and their drivers, for African countries to remove subsidies especially on agriculture while the US and Europe heavily subsidize agriculture – for example, Sanusi says cotton and cattle, the main exports of Mali are uncompetitive in the global market because a subsidy of 300 Euros per cow in Europe is higher than the per capita income in Mali, while the subsidies given to the US farmers is higher than the GDP of Mali. He however believes fuel subsidies are an exception, which as he argued in a talk at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) in January this year, amounts to “subsidizing consumption” when developing country governments should be “subsidizing production” instead. Thus harping on this kicking-the-ladder argument, Sanusi said “every (developed) country builds its country, its economy and productive capacities, based on protectionism, then preaches free market.”

Gerhatu speaking from a socio-political perspective attributed the challenges to development in Africa to that of nation-building, the fact that “nation-building has not been properly consummated in Africa” thus affecting the prospects for creating “viable states, sound economies and a viable future for Africa”. He however placed more emphasis on external factors, the “geo-political influences and world agendas” which have “held back” developing countries and African development in particular, such as the Cold War, the Digital Divide and Globalization.

Collier regards the failure of African development as a failure to build a sense of national identity as Gerhatu noted, but rather than attributing these to global geo-political agendas, he blamed the attitude of African political elite, mainly the “plundering of resources” by the political leadership in many resource rich countries. He also underscores the weak institutions and rules in such societies which make it difficult to efficiently harness and manage resources.

The Way Forward:

As was the case with outlining the problems, the speakers differed on some points and converged on others. Sanusi advocates for African economies to be built on comparative advantage based on their factor endowments — agriculture and extractive industries for instance — and creation of better value chains within individual economies; a change that regards Africa as the prime market for African countries; greater integration between African countries by building first class infrastructure in Africa which would make African exports competitive against non-African exports on the continent; investing in technical training to make African labour competitive; and importantly encouraging Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) which build productive capacities and discouraging foreign firms which import goods: whether Europe, China or the US he fimly notes, “imperialism is imperialism”.

Gerhatu on his own part advocates for “ownership of decisions and solutions for the sake of national interests” by Africans in order to create self reliance and capacity. He also emphasizes on economic liberation by ensuring a paradigm shift from a system of dependence on foreign aid which he regards as “a system of practice, a system of thinking and a system of organization which does not help… NGOs create parallel systems of administration” therefore “we cannot make aid effective”. He referred to Eritrea not only as a country where international NGOs have NOT been active since 1995, but also as an example of successful economic diversification where “agriculture has been the target of structural transformation…” According to the Ambassador, Eritrea’s increased agricultural productivity ensured the country was not affected by the Horn of Africa famine, in his words: “despite what you have heard on CNN, BBC or from the Secretary of State Hilary Clinton” referring to “efforts and conspiracies” aimed at destabilizing Eritrea’s successes in the name of Al-Shabab or Somalia which have been largely unsuccessful.

Professor Paul Collier

Professor Collier posited that the challenge for Africans is to “avoid repeating the same mistake”. This he believes could be achieved by taking the “never-again” approach Germany took, to resuscitate its flailing economy after World War II, such that it is now the best run economy in Europe. Translating this “never-again” feeling to reality Collier asserted can be achieved by:

(i) Legislating economic rules for decisions, for instance Ghana last year legislated that 30% of oil revenues have to be saved for the future;

(ii) Creating dedicated institutions for these rules;

(iii) Existence of a critical mass of citizens who understand why the rules and institutions matter.

It was tempting to ask whether this three-pronged process was feasible given that those in authority who will legislate these rules and ensure the institutions work are sometimes not particularly interested in doing so, but thankfully Collier explained that young people in North Africa using technology to coordinate, presented positive prospects as young people in the rest of Africa are waking up to the reality around them.

Interesting Highlights:

As is usual with such events, some of the most intriguing points were made during the Q & A session. One of the most profound points made was Sanusi’s reflection over the Nigerian fuel subsidy protests in January as comprising of two conversations: the removal of subsidy itself and government accountability. He throws the poser on why it had to take the removal of fuel subsidy to start the conversation on corruption and accountability by ordinary Nigerians and the civil society and why this conversation stopped after the protests. Sanusi indicts civil society in Nigeria of shirking their responsibility in keeping the political elite in check as he believes Nigerian politicians are not more corrupt than those in US or Europe, but that the difference lies in the fact that Americans and Europeans do not tolerate lack of accountability from their leaders. He stresses on the need for those conversations started by Occupy Nigeria to be kept alive by civil society in order to bring about the change Nigerians yearn for.

During the event, reference was made to African countries such as Botswana and Ghana which are “working” relative to others which aren’t, so this writer posed a question: that perhaps the reason why countries like Ghana and Botswana are relatively successful is because they are smaller in terms of size and population with relative homogeneity compared to large countries such as Nigeria and Kenya which arguably have been unable to successfully harness and manage their diversity thereby obstructing the process of nation-building and economic development. To this, Sanusi responded by blaming the competition for rent-seeking by the political elite and the failure of the elite to “allow us develop our national identity” in their rent-seeking quests. He advocates for social justice and pursuit of a path even development in order to give everyone a sense of belonging.

Lastly, if it is any consolation to Nigerians who were deeply irked by Collier’s op-ed piece, in which he compared the mass protests in Nigeria to the Tea Party movement in America, and referred to Occupy Nigeria protesters as “loudmouths of the street” and “opportunists”, Collier acknowledged receipt of angry emails, the fiercest and most overwhelming feedback he has ever received on any write up. We can smile smugly in satisfaction to that.

Overall, one could argue that events such as the Eirenicon-Africa lecture series organized and hosted by up and coming Africans, featuring African decision-makers, discussing home-grown solutions to the challenges bedevilling the continent’s development present bright prospects for the future, and a clean break from the norm, as more Africans are realizing the need to effectively arise and take charge of their destinies.

The insecurity in Nigeria especially with the orgy of violence unleashed by the group Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati Wal-Jihad popularly known as Boko Haram, or what I prefer to call the Boko Haram plague has been escalating as the group’s tactics have similarly evolved. Local and international media agencies have been falling over themselves to report (accurately and inaccurately) the group’s deadliest and bloodiest attacks. Journalists, columnists, pundits, analysts, experts, and bloggers all claiming some knowledge and expertise over the group’s activities, it can be argued, have covered all possible angles of the Boko Haram insurgency. However, what Andrew Stroehlein seems to have done differently is to go straight to the heart of the issue without looking at any angle per se. He focuses on the cold hard facts and that is why his sounds like the gospel truth to many. The four salient points which I believe the author strongly makes are:

First of all, he desists from treading the simplistic path taken by many foreign “analysts” and “experts” of depicting Nigeria as hopelessly polarized along a “predominantly Muslim North and Christian South” fault line, subtly implying the two parts are irreconcilable and probably better off apart than together. Consequently, Stroehlein does not succumb to the tendency to portray Boko Haram as a manifestation of a disgruntled and increasingly alienated “Muslim-North” unhappy with and trying to undermine the Federal government largely under the control of the “Christian-South”. He says: “Like other political and armed movements that have sprung up in this country, including the recent fuel subsidy protests that brought the country to a standstill, Boko Haram is just a symptom of the crumbling Nigerian state.” He does admit that: “…the vast majority of Nigerians do not turn to armed militancy, of the Islamist variety or any other…” By so doing, Stroehlein depicts Boko Haram rightly, as a bye product of state failure, bad governance and especially rampant corruption which he argues needs to be addressed by pouring “the oil wealth into government services rather than officials’ overseas bank accounts”. This is one point many analysts have alluded to, but perhaps because of the high level of tension and paranoia in the Nigerian public sphere, those who have made this argument have been rashly labelled as Boko Haram supporters or “sympathisers”. This fierce rejection of alternative narratives reminds me of journalist Richard Hall’s op-ed on the UK riots last year, where he makes a clear distinction between attempting to understand something and condoning it. In particular, Hall says:

“The impression appears to be that the crimes committed were so great and so senseless that to try and understand them is to condone them… Any discussion about the potential causes of the riots become indistinguishable from excusing those who carried them out, and those who attempt to analyse become apologists.”

In Nigeria, sadly this seems to be the case.

Secondly, the author points out that Boko Haram should be dealt with as criminals and also harps on an urgent need for reform of the Police, the intelligence agencies and strengthening the Judiciary’s independence to deal with such criminal challenges. Even though, Stroehlein links Boko Haram to the wider problems of poverty, corruption, bad governance and predatory management of state funds, he avoids the pitfall many foreign analysts fall into of advocating for an “appeasement” of the “marginalized” Northern-Muslim establishment (purportedly the sponsors of Boko Haram) who lost out in the current political dispensation as a way of mitigating and addressing the Boko Haram plague.

Alleged Christian Bombers arrested in Bauchi. Photo, courtesy Dailytimes Nigeria

Thirdly, the author corroborates what many have said before, especially those with first-hand knowledge of the North, that there are splinter groups of Boko Haram and that “Boko Haram” is now a cover for criminal activity across a wide spectrum. Stroehlein notes: “anything that turns violent can be blamed on the Islamist movement, whether it has a link to it or not. It is a perfect alibi, one that prevents further questioning. Bank robbery? Boko Haram. Attack on political opponents? Boko Haram.”  This became more evident in the recent high-profile abduction and murder of the British and Italian hostages, the group’s denial of its culpability given that it wastes no time in bragging about its violent attacks and the emergence of a new player, Al Qaeda in the land beyond the Sahel (AQIM) claiming responsibility for the abduction and murder. The argument about the existence of Boko Haram copycats is also given more credence especially when one considers that many of those caught-in-the-act whilst trying to burn churches in Bauchi in August 2011 and again in February 2012 and Bayelsa for instance are aggrieved church members or those who do not fit the typical Boko Haram profile.

Fourthly, Stroehlein makes a damning indictment of the media — both local and international — as concerned with being very sensationalist by misinformation and spreading fear and paranoia in covering the insurgency in Nigeria, typically spreading the now trite narrative that Boko Haram is a manifestation of the promise made by prominent “disgruntled Northern politicians who have vowed to make the country ungovernable for Goodluck Jonathan”. Stroehlein says: “the hype in much of the Nigerian media also contributes to the problem, as many media outlets chasing sales seem all too willing to fall for unsubstantiated rumour and outright lies proffered by political trouble-makers — or by nobody at all”. Of international media, he asserts their reports have: “also been more scare-mongering than substance, presenting this as a new terrorist threat to the West, when it is fundamentally a Nigerian issue.”

From these thrusts of Andrew Stroehlein’s piece and the reactions the article has elicited, it can be inferred that there is a deep-seated lack of trust in Nigeria between ordinary Nigerians of each other and of the government, fanned, aggravated and enabled by the local media feeding fat on public paranoia. The mutual distrust is symptomatic of the deep cleavages in Nigeria which have extended to the public sphere such that any attempt by traditional or religious leaders especially from the North where Boko Haram is most active to explain the context of group’s activity is misconstrued by a militant and sectional press, members of the public and even some politicians as trying to rationalise, sympathise or justify Boko Haram’s activities. Those who been persistently calling for dialogue with the group have been labelled Boko Haram “apologists“, even though the Federal Government has recently began talks with the group ostensibly out of realization that the purely militarized approach has done little if anything to contain the insurgency. Conversely, the general perception in the North, is that Boko Haram’s activities are a deliberate and calculated attempt at sabotage and destruction of the economy and social cohesion of the region from elsewhere.

The danger here is that this distrust is increasingly preventing sincere, meaningful, fruitful national discourse in the Nigerian public sphere on Boko Haram and insecurity in Nigeria. Consequently, analysts like Stroehlein who sum the facts we are all aware of and state the obvious are seen to have said something spectacular (and it is in many respects) precisely because in our national subconscious Stroehlein falls outside the categories and labels we are increasingly allowing ourselves to be boxed into — “Christian”, “Muslim”, “Northerner”, “Southerner” “Core North”, “Middle Belt”, “Minority” etc — he is regarded as a neutral party more capable of stating the unbiased facts apparent to everyone better than Nigerians themselves.

Effectively tackling Boko Haram requires a strategic, concerted, collective and coordinated action by all and sundry: not just the government and security agencies, but traditional and religious leaders, the media and members of the public. This would entail an adept combination of the military approach, dialogue and any other effective tactic as is required and is deemed fit. Unless Nigerians come to the realization that everyone is a stakeholder when it comes to Boko Haram and appreciate the need to engage in meaningful discourse on what Boko Haram stands for, the threats it poses to national security and social cohesion and ways of halting the orgy of violence, Boko Haram will continue “winning” against Nigerians.

“I should have known that ambition and success were not to be expected in an African woman. An African woman should be a good African woman whose qualities should be coyness, shyness, submissiveness, incompetence and crippling dependency. A highly educated independent African woman is bound to be dominant, aggressive, uncontrollable, a bad influence.”

                  – Professor Wangari Mathaai (1979) right after the collapse of her marriage with Mwangi Mathai

The month of March has a number of internationally recognized days celebrating women’s accomplishments, achievements and the special place women occupy in society. There is the International Women’s Day (IWD) celebrated globally on March 8th and the forthcoming Mother’s day celebrated between March and April depending on the country. In the case of the former, the IWD, despite (ironically) having its origins in socialist political events and worker’s movements in the early 1900s, by 1975, during International Women’s Year, the United Nations (UN) began celebrating International Women’s Day on 8 March and by 1977, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution proclaiming a UN Day for Women’s Rights and International Peace to be observed by Member States. The official UN theme for International Women’s Day 2012 is “Empower Rural Women — End Hunger and Poverty.” All over the world, women everyday are taking giant strides in breaking free of stereotypes and in improving their lives, those of their families and of their communities. In Sub-Saharan Africa as well, women are doing remarkable things – from Nobel Prize winners recognized by the international community to the ordinary women doing extra-ordinary things every day.

When strong African women are mentioned, heavy weights come to mind such as the late Kenyan activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Professor Wangari Muta Maathai who passed away in September 2011. Maathai founded the Green Belt Movement in 1977 which planted over 30 million trees, she was an advocate for better sustainability in the management of natural resources, she worked with women to improve their livelihoods by increasing their access to resources like firewood for cooking and clean water and was a pro-democracy and human rights activist. Others include Liberia’s president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the first female elected African Head of State, who won the Nobel peace prize last year for her efforts in rebuilding post-conflict Liberia such as negotiating significant debt relief, anti-corruption efforts, starting the truth and reconciliation commission to address crimes committed during the Liberian civil war and overseeing a rise in school enrolment by 40%. Sirleaf shared the Nobel laurel with fellow Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee who mobilised Christian and Muslim women in Liberia to call for an end to the brutal 14-year civil war by fasting, praying and campaigning for an immediate ceasefire and dialogue between the government and the rebels, and also convincing Charles Taylor to step down. The award-winning documentary Pray the Devil Back to Hell  chronicles the incredible efforts of Gbowee and her women’s movement in ending the civil war. Others include internationally renowned Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo, author of Dead Aid: Why Aid is Not Working, Siza Mzimela the CEO of South African Airways, Mariéme Jamme a London-based philanthropist, technologist and social entrepreneur, and so many others.

Chimamanda Adichie

Coming closer home, in Nigeria, we have heavy weights such as Professor Dora Akunyili former Director-General of the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) who has received international recognition and awards for her work in public health and pharmacology; Dr. Ngozi Okonjo Iweala the Harvard-educated first female Minister of Finance in Nigeria, famous for negotiating the historic debt cancellation of $18 billion (60%) of Nigeria’s external debt with the Paris Club in 2005 and for fostering greater fiscal transparency in government. Though her reputation and popularity in Nigeria slightly plunged due to her prominent role in the Nigerian government’s recent removal of fuel subsidy, she still remains a powerful and brilliant woman who has made an indelible mark in a terrain dominated by men. Okonjo-Iweala is listed on the Forbes list of the World’s Most Powerful Black Women and Forbes Africa’s list of the 20 Most Powerful Women in Africa. There is also Mrs. Obiageli “Oby” Ezekwesili, currently a World Bank Vice President for the Africa Region responsible for projects, economic and sectoral work in 47 Sub-Saharan countries; Mrs. Amina Ibrahim, a Senior Special Assistant to the President of Nigeria on the Millennium Development Goals, described by BBC reporter Mark Doyle as a “frank and intelligent woman”. Also worthy of note is Justice Aloma Mariam Mukhtar (CON) the first female Supreme Court justice in Nigeria, and Mrs. Ifueko Omogui the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS)responsible for driving institutional changes to reform the tax system in Nigeria.Outside the public sector, we have young up and coming women who are blazing the trail in their various fields of endeavour such as the award winning writer Chimamanda Adichie  listed on the Forbes’ 20 Youngest Power Women of Africa and Nollywood movie stars such as Genevieve Nnaji, who is regarded as “Africa’s most revered actress” and one of the most influential celebrities in Africa. There are many more of such amazing and inspiring women in Nigeria and across Africa.

By far, one of the most remarkable and extraordinary instances of a woman’s resilience in the harsh terrain in Sub Saharan Africa is that of Rabi’atu Abubakar Mashi, the female truck-driver with Dangote Cement company, in the conservative Northern state of Katsina, perhaps the only female truck driver in Northern Nigeria. Hers is a story of courage as she defies stereotypes whilst eking out a living doing something traditionally not associated with women neither in the developed world nor in the developing world. Her interview with the Weekly Trust newspaper HERE reveals that:

As a divorcee with two children it can be inferred that Rabi’atu’s income comes in handy in catering to her basic needs and that of her children, keeping her self sufficient, in an environment where the rate of divorces is reaching alarming proportions and divorced women who are typically without meaningful sources of livelihoods end up as dependents and a liability to themselves and their families. Interestingly, Rabi’atu acknowledges that she is doing something extraordinary and hopes that other women will follow the trail she has blazed. Having successfully trained and mentored another woman, she confirms that her protégé could soon start driving her own truck for the same company. Additionally, Rabi’atu is mindful of her deeply conservative environment built on mostly cultural and Islamic prescriptions which place a high level of importance on marriage. Thus she hopes to be remarry but prays that her husband doesn’t discourage her from the lucrative truck driving business she is very passionate about.

This is an amazing story of strength, courage and resilience. For pursuing her dreams in a tough environment and perhaps inspiring other women to take charge of their destinies and empower themselves, Rabi’atu deserves to be crowned woman of the year. I am probably over-excited and stretching it a bit, but a Nigerian Woman of the Year award would do. The fact that she is from my home state, Katsina is a plus and a feel-good factor for me . There are certainly many more women like Rabi’atu all around the world setting the pace in their own unique way, yet it is their individual efforts which collectively make a difference.

Russian president-elect Vladmir Putin crying at his "victory" speech, with outgoing president Dmitry Medvedev standing behind him

With tears streaming down his cheeks, Vladmir Putin outgoing Prime Minister and now President-elect of Russia declared with great conviction, that his victory in the just concluded presidential elections was the outcome of an “open and honest battle”. While his speech attracted cheers and ovation from many supporters, members of the opposition like prominent anti-corruption blogger Alexei Navalny, claim that Putin shed crocodile tears out of fear of public backlash from elections marred by irregularities. Not surprisingly, the international media has placed the Russian elections in the spotlight albeit with a cynical slant of how they were skewed heavily in favour of an easy Putin victory over other candidates. In all this, African observers like me on the fringe cannot help wondering if half of the critical scrutiny were directed towards elections in many Sub Saharan African countries, where it is needed most, then perhaps there might be considerable improvements in aspects of our electoral democracy in Africa.

Of course it will be naive to dismiss the importance of Russia as a major global player. Despite the collapse and disintegration of the defunct Soviet Republic into present day Russia and several other countries and its downgrade from a near equal of the US during the Cold War era Russia to middle income, developing country status, Russia is still the largest country in the world in terms of land mass; it has a huge population; it is one of the five permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and one of the BRICS. Russia is a major player in geo politics especially due to its typically diametric stance with many Western countries on key issues in international security such as Iran’s nuclear activity. Thus, elections in Russia are bound to attract global attention and scrutiny compared to say, elections in Malawi, Gambia or Cameroon.

The 85 year old incumbent President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal. It is widely believed that he is much older than he claims to be.

That said, the victory of Putin in the elections came as no surprise to any keen observer of events in Russia, whom it is widely believed was the real power wielder as Prime Minister to Dmitry Medvedev. According to a poll conducted in September 2009 by the Levada Center in which 1,600 Russians took part, 13% believed Medvedev held the most power, 32% Putin, and 48% both. Nevertheless, Putin’s overbearing influence and authority pale into insignificance in comparison with some of our octogenarian, yet energetic African despots – the Wades, the Biyas and the Mugabes. Incumbent President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal for instance, despite being well over 85 years old and having exhausted his constitutionally permitted term limits, went to great lengths to ensure he contested in the February 26^th 2012 Presidential elections. Wade altered the constitution in 2011 to enable him contest for a third term, and banned some rival candidates like Grammy award-winning singer Youssou N’dour from contesting. Wade’s violent crackdown on mass protests that trailed his refusal to back down which led to deaths of innocent, unarmed civilians betray his desperation to cling to power against popular will, willing to risk to his democratic credentials as a democratic reformer, jeopardizing the stability and cohesion of Senegal which has been a beacon of democratic stability in the region. Wade remains adamant despite entreaties by other African strong-men like former Nigerian President, Olusegun Obasanjo who have tested, tried and given up on the tenure elongation bid.

Certainly Putin’s strong-man tactics, “creeping authoritarianism”, and manipulation of the political system comes nowhere near Wade’s open secretive plans of paving the way for his son to ascend the Presidency once he secures his re-election bid constitutionally or extra-constitutionally. Nor does it compare with Joseph Kabila’s blatant nepotism in ensuring that his twin sister and brother were both elected to the parliament of the Democratic Republic of Congo in January 2012 in elections described as flawed and “chaotic” by local and international observers.

The criticism of the presidential elections in Russia stem from procedural and “voting irregularities” which ensured Putin’s victory was secured by fair or foul means, mostly the latter in the eyes of the international media, international election observers and Western governments. These irregularities included the “limited electoral choice” for the electorate according to Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) monitors, “the conditions under which the campaign was conducted, the partisan use of government resources and procedural irregularities on election day” according to the official US statement, the dominance of the media and campaign space by Putin to the detriment of other candidates, and heavy handed tactics by the security forces towards those protesting the results. Despite analysts’ and pundits’ claims that the margin of Putin’s victory was inflated and about 50% and not the 64% of the vote, it will by no means compare to the audacious inflation of figures in some parts of Nigeria during the 2011 Presidential elections. Some states in the South-East and South-South – the incumbent’s home base – recorded between 86%, according to the EU election monitors and up to 98% voter turn-out, a near impossibility in elections as the highest possible turn-out for the most enthusiastic and politically conscious electorate is usually pegged by political scientists at around 60 to 70%.

Of course this does not excuse the irregularities or manipulation of the electoral system by Putin as there is room for substantial improvement. Putin also stressed the need for a thorough investigation of all election violations. However, even the critics credit the Russian government for marginal improvements in elections in Russia. The US government acknowledged the Russian government’s efforts to reform the system while the French foreign minister in his reaction to Putin’s victory stated: “The election was not exemplary … [but] … there was no brutal repression during the campaign, as might have been the case in other times,”. In addition, the installation of 200,000 webcams at polling booths to prevent ballot stuffing and the ability of citizens to engage in peaceful protests are an indication of the improvements in the Russian public sphere unlike what obtained earlier.

("Emperor") Paul Biya of Cameroon now serving his sixth term in office

However, the key point here is that more countries around the world require this scrutiny and critical dissection of the electoral system which perhaps might propel their respective governments to conduct relatively credible elections at least that would meet minimum international standards. If the elections and “election-like events” in parts of Sub-Saharan Africa even measured-up to the standard of the Russian elections, warts and all, then many of our political problems might be more manageable. Many African incumbents and closet autocrats get away with the farce and caricature of elections which consolidate their firm grip on power because they are able to escape the radar in their nefarious activities. For instance, with the little media attention the 2011 elections in Cameroon received, how many can even recall that Paul Biya, the autocrat in civilian garb (infamously nicknamed “The Sphinx”) has firmly held onto the reins of power in Cameroon for about 30 years, deftly succeeding himself in every election?

Clearly, there is undue emphasis on the elections in Russia to the detriment of elections in other Southern countries in the world, especially in Sub Saharan Africa where such attention, scrutiny and spotlight by the international community might actually assist civil society groups and activists in pressurising African leaders to embark on genuine electoral reforms. This is because there is a wide held view that many African leaders hardly respond to the demands of their electorate alone, so this international media scrutiny could assist civil society groups in this regard.

The popular adage “There’s no such thing as a free lunch” kept crossing my mind in the run-up to the just concluded London Conference on Somalia. I wondered why a gathering focusing on a Sub Saharan African country was to be hosted by the UK government in London, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to be precise. I thought of keeping my musings to myself until I found that a number of people shared the same sentiments, especially my Kenyan friend Kenneth Ochieng who summed up these sentiments on his blog page which I have copied at the end of this post.

Such a global gathering to discuss the way forward out of the litany of problems plaguing Somalia, referred to by policy makers and development experts as the archetypal “failed state” is certainly a commendable and progressive step. This is especially because Somalia’s problems of collapsed state institutions, Al-Shabab terrorism, piracy and humanitarian crisis affect not just Somalia but neighbouring countries such as Kenya and Ethiopia, and successfully tackling these problems requires a concerted transnational effort with the relevant stakeholders.

However, my grouse here is why this gathering heavily attended by many African Heads of States, African multilateral organizations and other world leaders was hosted by British Prime Minister David Cameron in London? Understandably, the safety of dignitaries couldn’t be compromised by holding it in Somalia, thus I wondered why the confab couldn’t be hosted neither by Jonathan in Abuja or Attah Mills in Accra; nor Kibaki in Nairobi in the Horn of Africa within the vicinity of Somalia itself, nor Zuma in Johannesburg. The conference couldn’t convene in the brand new glitzy African Union Headquarters literally built from scratch and furnished by Chinese funds and labour. One could perhaps assume that a conference on the Nigerian Boko Haram insurgency group (probably the next biggest security threat in the region), would be held in some swanky conference hall in Washington D.C., New York, Berlin or Paris.

I simply wonder when African leaders would grow up, be more assertive in handling African affairs and wean themselves off international help over every thing (apparently including having our regional headquarters built for free or confabs on African security held in far away European capitals). Yet at the slightest opportunity, when it suits our African leaders, they utter populist “pan-African” rhetoric about being “dictated-to” and constrained by “imperialist” Western nations. I wonder when we are ever going to grasp the dynamics of international politics and realize that nations hardly do things for others involving massive funds on the basis of pure altruism but mainly based on what would benefit them. When would we start put our own national interests on the front burner before taking any step, in this case seizing the opportunity of such an international gathering to showcase our beautiful capital cities and improve outsiders’ perceptions of Africa for instance, and cut costs associated with funding such international travels?

With the conference over and a laudable communiqué released which inspires some hope on the future of security in Somalia, I hope our African leaders would subsequently consider being more assertive in holding such gatherings in an African country — even though the follow-up conference in June 2012 is billed to take place in Istanbul, Turkey. For one it would show our seriousness in taking charge of our destiny like other developing regions are doing and not painting the image of a helpless, dependent continent. For another it would boost the profile of the city holding such a gathering especially in the international media, and also bring in some foreign revenue to the local economy from hosting and accommodating delegates.

As I stated earlier, Kenneth Ochieng succinctly echoes my sentiments on this issue. Find below his write-up titled Listen Mr. African ‘STATESMAN’: Rants of a Troubled Pan-Africanist originally posted on his blog, Okwarohztake:

On television, she was familiar: the skin tone that suggested cheap bleaching creams, the ambitious hair weave, the melodrama. An American friend of mine thought her interview too theatrical and therefore unbelievable. Instead, I saw a woman speaking a non-native language, and so compensating with gestures…Diallo comes from a place where melodrama is not unusual, and often suggests truth as much as lies. — Chimamanda Adichie

i think that adichie’s observations are spot on, felt the same way watching diallo’s interview with robin roberts. i found myself wanting to explain to all my friends, colleagues, even strangers on the street what is difficult to put in words: the times i myself have felt powerless, submissive, unable to stand up for or even defend myself. and i’m an ivy league-educated woman.

i cannot count the amount of times i have been in a relationship with a man whose needs and desires seemed to always trump my own. my inability still, in fact, to clearly state what my needs and desires are, whether they be to be left alone, in peace, free from cat calls on the street or “accidental” gropings from strangers on a crowded subway car.

i might also mention the time when, while I waited for a train on a subway platform near NYU, a man started masturbating–vigorously, freely–while leering at me. he was indian (or bangladeshi or pakistani), perhaps with some undiagnosed mental health problem. i looked at his face for a long time, his tongue licking his lips feverishly, before i even noticed what was going on down below. though i had done nothing wrong, or to invite him, the act sullied us both.

it was only the two of us standing at that end of the platform, so i ran to the mta official at the booth on the other side, tho i’m certain he was gone by the time a cop came.  i thought about that a long time after that day, wondering if there was something else i could do to limit these unwanted encroachments on my psyche, person. and i realize that i also harbored a quiet outrage given my supposed social status.

i was born in the united states, though my immigrant parents did a good job of taking us “back home” so we would understand where we came from, speak a bit of the language, cook, dance, and hopefully marry well. as a result of this upbringing, i cannot in certain ways comprehend what nafissatou faced at home and getting here, how she fought for asylum and the financial stability to raise her daughter singlehandedly.

it comes with some irony, then, that our private lives–lived away from the public eye–could bear so many similarities.

like nafissatou, i too dated a con artist. i was 25 and he was 38 (tho he lied and told me 35), an ivorian restaurateur and former boxer. he charged thousands of dollars in supplies for his restaurant that i later took him to small claims court to collect, tho he never paid. i couldn’t make the payments and my credit rating plummeted while he eventually mismanaged the restaurant into oblivion, leaving me to lick my wounds, pick myself up out of debt, and live to tell the tale.

no, i do not really know how much he charged on my card. i gave it to him because he said that he loved and wanted to marry me. it sounds rather naive now, but at the time it was what i thought i should do, what i had seen my mother do.  and in the end, i don’t doubt that diallo’s and my private lives are so similar because our mothers, and their mothers were similar too. this type of submissiveness must be a learned thing passed down through generations. why so many strong, outspoken african women feign submission and so often stay in relationships with men who treat them so badly.

it would be appropo to mention here that i am in pre-production on a short film, called the people v. aissatou ba, about an african immigrant woman moving on with her life while the man who assaulted her walks free. it is inspired by the dsk case and asks the question:  what price does aissatou pay for telling the truth?

i’m not sure who the jury would have believed. i’d like to say that there is a part of each of us that recognizes the truth, our shared humanity, but i’ve learned over time that this idea is often a self-satisfying delusion. i look forward to all the ways we african women–who can read and write, unlike nafissatou–will translate and re-language this experience for the world. for more info on the film, visit my indiegogo page. –AL.

Public residential buildings are seen in Po Lam, one of the "satellite towns" in Hong Kong, on September 14, 2011. This southern Chinese city is described as a concrete forest, famous for the number of high-rise commercial and residential towers. About 25 percent of the world's tallest 100 residential buildings stand in the territory. (Reuters/Bobby Yip)

“Our world is one of terrible contradictions… Plenty of food but one billion people go hungry. Lavish lifestyles for a few, but poverty for too many others.”

-          UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon 31^st Oct 2011

Just two minutes before midnight on the 31^st of October 2011, in the crowded Jose Fabella Memorial Hospital in Manila Philippines, the tiny Danica May Camacho was born. A few thousand kilometres away in Mall village Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state, Baby Nargis was born at 07:25 local time (01:55GMT). Both babies along with several others around the world have been identified as seven billionth babies, marking the 7 billion milestone of the world’s population identified by the United Nations. This staggering and somewhat fascinating massive surge in global population has brought to the fore many issues primarily bordering on the consequences of the growing population on global resources and its impact on the environment. The question is that is this really a problem and does this really signal a population crisis? If so will the proposed measures actually address this problem?

Global population has been on a dramatic and rapid increase in the last two centuries. Right from the late 18^th century when the renowned British economist and clergyman, Reverend Thomas Malthus famously remarked that “the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man”, or in other words, that the geometric increase in global population would far outstrip the arithmetic increase in food production, the world’s population  reached 1 billion in 1804,  hit 2 billion in 1927 after 123 years, then the pace accelerated to 3 billion in 1959, 4 billion in 1974, 5 billion in 1987, 6 billion in 1998  and now 7 billion in 2011 and counting. According to UN forecasts, the world would have more than 10 billion people by 2083. While the bulk of this population increase is in developing countries, half of this population it is projected will come from Sub-Saharan Africa which already has the highest birth-rates and the deepest poverty in countries such as Niger, Burundi, Mali, Nigeria. As the driver of this population increase is fertility, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and renowned development economist states that in such countries, families have 6-8 children on average while simultaneously in the developed world, fertility rates have reduced.

As global population increases, the world is not only becoming overcrowded according to some demographers, environmentalists and development economists, but also that finite and exhaustible global resources such as fossil fuels, soil fertility, forests, fisheries and ground water are being rapidly depleted. Thus there has been a corresponding increase in food scarcity, droughts, water shortages, competition for viable energy sources and environmental damage due to increased use of fossil fuels, pollution and deforestation.  Such experts state that food and most especially water shortages if not checked, could fuel political destabilization in developing countries. Nowhere is this more evident than in the recent and still on going drought and famine in the horn of Africa which has affected over 11 million people in Somalia, parts of Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti and Uganda, regarded by the UNHCR as the worst humanitarian crisis of the region in 60 years. The growing phenomenon of “land grabbing” where companies in countries like Saudi Arabia, China and the UK acquire large hectares of land in places such as Ethiopia, Angola, Ghana, Madagascar, Ukraine and Sierra Leone  fuelled by a desire to capture water resources to irrigate farmlands for large-scale agriculture and growing bio-fuel crops also lends credence to this argument, as it leaves subsistence farmers displaced, vulnerable and at the expense of these large corporations.

Most importantly, the persistence of poverty and underdevelopment in these developing countries as evidenced by lack of employment opportunities, increase in violent conflict over access to food, water and other economic opportunities and the prevalence of diseases like HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis are aggravated by a growing unmanaged population. The population density of large cities such as Lagos, Jakarta and Mumbai ensures that such diseases are easily spread.

Most of the solutions to arrest this population crisis proposed by the development experts revolve around family planning policies to be put in place by the government since the people in these countries are regarded as too poor and incapable of making such choices themselves. As Jeffrey Sachs argues, family planning would be available and the families would be expected to VOLUNTARILY choose to have fewer children which would be better for them and for their children as they would have better nutrition, better healthcare and greater opportunities of living better lives for “when they are very very poor, they need help to be able to have those choices”.

However, one cannot help wondering whether this issue is really being examined from the most pragmatic perspective. While indeed growing population is putting a strain on global resources, evidence shows that the rising population in developing countries has little bearing on the consumption of global resources. The UN Human Development Report (HDR) shows that 54% of global income goes to the richest 10% of the world’s population, while 2.5 billion people living on less than $2 a day or 40% of the world’s population receive only 5% of global income. The Economist reported in January 2011 that “the richest 1% of adults control 43% of the world’s assets; the wealthiest 10% have 83% of global assets while the bottom 50% have only 2%”. In fact according to The Guardian UK of the 23rd October 2011, one Briton has the carbon footprint of about 22 Africans. Even in terms of carbon emissions and pollution, it is mostly perpetrated by industries, firms and corporations of developed countries. As George Monbiot, an author and activist notes, in the face of western over-consumption criticising expanding population in developing countries means “blaming the victims”

Furthermore, overcrowding and population density typically abound in major cities in both the developed and the developing world. John Bongaarts of the New York-based Population Council notes that ”most of that growth will be in Africa’s cities, and in those cities it will almost all be in slums where living conditions are horrible”. Thus, many small towns and rural areas in developing countries have large swathes of land which are sparsely populated and could accommodate millions of people easily. It is noteworthy that other factors such as rampant rural-urban migration account for the swelling population of many developing-country cities.  Conversely many developed economies in Europe, North America and even parts of East Asia are faced with shrinking birth rates and rapidly ageing populations notably Japan, Italy and Russia where birth rates are lower than replacement rates of less than 2.1 children per woman. In order to reverse this ageing population, countries like Russia have initiated a policy known as “mother capital” where women are paid about $10,000 to have more than one child albeit with little success. Thus, there seems to be plenty of space to fit everyone and more as it has even been argued that the entire 7 billion people of the earth could fit shoulder-to-shoulder in the city of Los Angeles, California.

It is also worth considering that if global population is putting a strain on global resources and threatening the delicate eco balance, should the most viable solution then, be embarking on projects of halting this growing population in developing countries through family planning? This is far from pragmatic, it is unsustainable, not to mention highly unfair for if as evidence shows, developing countries are not responsible for excessive over consumption of resources and the world still has space to accommodate so many more people, then why should people’s reproductive rights be interfered with? What assurances are there that some governments would not embark on over-zealous coercive depopulation measures such as India’s mass sterilisation campaign in the 1970s where thousands of men and women were forced to undergo vasectomy and tubal ligation respectively. Whole villages were reported to have been rounded up for sterilisation with a ruthless efficiency and it persists to this day, though to a much lesser extent.

The following pictures by professional freelance photographer and author Nick Rain, shot in December 2003, reveals the sordid story of the mass sterilization camps in India:

 In a remote part of India on the border with Nepal a local clinic managed to convince the local women to come enmasse to undergo sterilization to combat poverty. The women however were not aware how the crude operation would be carried out. The operation took place inside the dirty clinic with hundreds of women waiting like cattle to be operated on.Copyright: Nick Rain.

One by one the women were put on the operating table, the instrument used looked like a twelve inch metal tube with a sharp edge at one end. It was then forced into the womans stomach and the physician looked through the instrument and made what looked like a twist and a snip, a quick stich and a plaster and the women were dragged outside to recover on the grass. This operation is called Tubal Ligation. Copyright: Nick Rain.

In the face of deeply entrenched socio-cultural beliefs and values over reproductive rights in many developing countries, where children are regarded as a “blessing” from God and the inability to bear children easily leads to stigmatization, or in rural areas where children are still seen as a sign of wealth so that they can work on farms, it is quite unlikely that people can be reasonably convinced to drastically limit the number of children they bring into this world. Suspicion and allegations of covert Western support and prodding for coercive population control in developing countries does not help matters either given that wealthy countries like US from 1966 under President Lyndon Johnson, Japan, Sweden and UK have devoted large funds to reducing Third World birth rates. For example, in Peru, the government of former President Alberto Fujimori’s forced sterilization of hundreds of thousands of poor, rural Peruvians between 1995 and 2000 under a “public health” plan is reported to have been principally financed using funds from USAID, the Japanese Nippon Foundation, and later, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). In Nigeria there have been various controversies over alleged “covert” plans by global powers to sterilize women and control population.

With such facts, one could argue that the international community seems to be unrealistically putting undue emphasis on population and birth control in developing countries at the expense of more important issues such as providing greater opportunities for education and empowerment so that the poor and disadvantaged can have better opportunities in life, can be lifted out of poverty and contribute meaningfully to their communities’ development. Improving access to basic agriculture technologies for many people in the poorest countries whose livelihoods depend on subsistence farming is one way to reduce the threat of food scarcity. As research shows that women who finish at least secondary school are in a better position to make informed choices about their reproductive options and are more likely to plan for and have fewer kids that they can actually take care of, educating and empowering women should be the top priority. The growing youth population of many Sub Saharan countries such as Nigeria or Kenya where up to half the population is under 25 years old, regarded by experts as a “youth dividend” could fuel a productive surge if they are meaningfully engaged, trained, educated  and their potential utilized. It is very easy to envision how the potential of the teeming youth of Nigeria’s over 166 million people could be harnessed to revive the agriculture sector and to power desperately needed manufacturing and industrialization especially in the North.

Therefore, while world population especially in developing countries is growing at a rapid pace, a more realistic, pragmatic and sustainable approach needs to be taken by the development community in managing the situation by advocating for a balance in utilization and consumption of resources. Developing country governments in Sub Saharan Africa on their own part need to focus more on empowering their vibrant and dynamic people and orienting them towards more sustainable development.

P.S.

The video below is an episode of a show on Russia Today called Cross Talk, where current affairs are discussed. The debate in this episode centers around the population crisis debate.

Colonel Mu’amar Gadhafi was so many things to different people. A generally eccentric person with a penchant for making controversial and often rambling statements, some regard him as a hero and revolutionary. He supported the  People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola MPLA in the 1970s, the anti-apartheid movement and Africa National Congress (ANC) in South Africa even when Western powers were opposed, he played a prominent role in the transformation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) to the African Union (AU) in 2001 and remains one of its largest financial contributors, he gave massive financial aid to many African countries including Niger, Chad, Angola and he was a champion of pan-Africanism and African unity.

At home, he used Libya’s immense oil revenues to provide Libyans with social benefits. According to award winning author and journalist Kira Salak, Gadhafi tried to the best of his ability to deliver on his promise to provide “a home for all Libyans” as great modern cities and new residential areas rose from the dust of the Sahara. Entire populations living in ancient mud-brick caravan towns in the desert moved to modern dwellings with running water, electricity, and satellite TV. Such social development policies placed Libya in 2010 at high human development on the UN Human Development Index (HDI) in terms of income, life expectancy and education above countries like Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Russia and Brazil. In fact according to World Bank figures 97% of urban dwellers have access to “improved sanitation facilities” in Libya, 21% points above the world average. In 2010, the GDP of Libya was growing at 10.6%, the highest of any African country.

At the same time, Gadhafi is regarded as an erratic, brutal dictator who denied his people basic freedoms, the freedom of expression and even access to the Internet. He brutally crushed all dissent in Libya and is alleged to have habitually conducted public hangings and mutilations of political opponents. The Gadhafi regime was regarded as one of the biggest state sponsors of terror. His World Revolutionary Center (WRC), an institution near Benghazi is credited with training some African revolutionaries some of whom became notorious tyrants such as Blaise Compaoré of Burkina Faso and Idriss Déby of Chad.  He is also accused of supporting rebel, separatist and even extremist groups such as the IRA in the UK, Liberia’s Charles Taylor and Foday Sankoh’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF) responsible for amputating the limbs of innocent men, women and children in Sierra Leone; he had a hand in wars in Chad and Sudan and is even alleged to have more knowledge of the Lockerbie bombing incident than he lets out. His acquisition of weapons of mass destruction led to attempts to acquire nuclear weapons severally from China, Pakistan and India and an active chemical weapons arsenal which he abandoned after the Iraq invasion in 2003. In March 2010, Gadhafi drew the ire of most Nigerians when he infamously called for the balkanization of Nigeria along a Muslim-Christian divide in order to bring an end to the frequent ethno-religious crises.

His status as a brutal dictator came to a head with the violent crushing of protests in Benghazi in February 2011 as homemade videos were purported to have shown. However, unlike the mass protests in Tunisia and Egypt where citizens from all walks of life congregated on the streets of Tunis and Cairo respectively devoid of NATO intervention, rebels from the eastern city of Benghazi now called the “birth-place” of the uprising started the movement against Gaddafi’s regime, they weren’t even in the Capital city. It is a widely accepted fact that without the UN no-fly zone, the training, logistics and even ground forces provided by the French, British and to an extent Qatari governments to the Libyan rebels in Benghazi and also the NATO bombing campaign which significantly weakened Gadhafi’s forces and enabled the rebels to march on to Tripoli, the outcome of the Libyan uprising would have been significantly different.

I keep thinking that what if at the peak of the Niger-Delta insurgency in Nigeria between 2007-2009, rather than an amnesty programme initiated by the government of Late President Umar Musa Yar’adua and current President Goodluck Jonathan for the militants to lay down their arms and undergo rehabilitation, a NATO bombing campaign had been carried on in Abuja and training provided by foreign governments to enable the militants march on and overthrow the government in Abuja? Okay maybe that’s not the best analogy given that there weren’t many home-made videos circulating the Internet documenting JTF’s alleged brutal containment of the Niger-Delta insurgency, which only worsened the situation before the amnesty programme or that Colonel Gadhafi had been in power for over 40years and maybe Libyans just wanted fresh blood at the helms of affairs.

Of course in the face of the full-might of NATO forces, Gadhafi did not stand a chance. Plus Gadhafi’s biggest problem, like most dictators, is that he did not know when to quit. The dashing, young, populist revolutionary who liberated his people from the oppressive clutches of the King Idris monarchy in 1969 transitioned to a leader despised by people who probably just got tired of being led by the same person. With the eventual capture of Tripoli on 23^rd August 2011, Gadhafi and his family fled, but the battle raged on in other cities, notably Sirte, his stronghold. Finally on October 20^th, the NTC announced that Gadhafi was captured and wounded, and moments later he was reported to have died. Then the conflicting reports of how the Colonel died began. Gadhafi’s convoy was said to have been struck by a fighter jet, another account says he was wounded in a gun fight and died in an ambulance on the way to the hospital, then videos emerged of a seemingly injured and bloodied Gadhafi captured and taunted by NTC forces. The general consensus is that he died of a gun-shot to the head. The UN, British government and Amnesty international amongst others have demanded a probe into this summary execution which violates the Geneva conventions.

Now what is most worrying about all this is the behaviour of the NTC which appears to be increasingly adopting some of Ghadhafi’s brutal tactics they initially started fighting against. He was obviously murdered: whether as a premeditated action or perpetrated by a random, over-enthusiastic and angry NTC fighter, while the extent of NATO’s complicity is also questioned as its actions and intense bombing campaign against the Gadhafi regime are widely regarded to have overstepped its original mandate to enforce the UN no-fly zone, despite its repeated insistence that its mission is not regime change or the assassination of Gadhafi. Furthermore, the humiliation and virtual desecration of the former leader’s corpse which is now being stored in a halal meat cooler in Misrata, on a cheap mattress is most unbefitting a former leader, utterly disrespectful and sickening. It is also contrary to Islamic tradition which prescribes the immediate burial of the dead. What is more, is the reaction of some foreign leaders to this extra-judicial execution which negates every sense of humanity or decency. The same leaders that hugged and kissed Ghadhafi, literally speaking are now celebrating this summary execution as a “victory” for freedom and democracy. Excuse me, is the irony lost on anyone else?

The fact is that no one in their right mind would support Gadhafi or any leader staying too long in power, monopolizing it and treating it as hereditary for the gist was that he wanted to hand over power to his son, Saif-al-Islam. People should be free to choose who they want to govern them. My problem here is with the way Gadhafi was ousted, with NATO exceeding is original UN mandate and taking sides in what was obviously a civil war, assisting insurgents to unseat a legitimate (though not democratic) sitting leader and the celebration of his summary execution by not only foreign leaders who were once his friends and allies but also the sickening and disturbing display of his bruised corpse by newspapers preaching freedom, democracy and human rights. He was in power for 42years yet the world didn’t know he was brutal, dictatorial or was oppressing his own people.  It is such inconsistency in the foreign policies of some Western governments which fuels the conspiracy theories.

In addition, reports of mistreatment, torture and even murder of perceived Ghadhafi supporters and loyalists, especially black Sub-saharan migrants who are mostly erroneously accused of being Ghadhafi’s mercenaries are equally worrying. Even during Ghaddafi’s days, black immigrants were subjected to racism, exploitation and xenophobic attacks. With the uprising, Amnesty International reports the arbitrary imprisonment, beatings and killings of mostly innocent dark skinned Libyans and Sub Saharan migrants by NTC forces, on the assumption that they are hired mercenaries.

While I wish the Libyan people well, and hope they kind of system they so deserve. They, especially, NTC should realize that they are embarking on a long journey of rebuilding a country scarred by bombs, bloodshed and picking-up the pieces after the fall of Ghadhafi. State-building in such a situation where institutions of the state have been personalized and modelled after Gaddafi is going to be a long and possibly ardous process. In all this, adopting the same brutal tactics they complained Ghadhafi used against ordinary Libyans surely will not bode well for the new democratic and free Libya they are hoping for.

A crush once told me that her mother warned her to beware of Nigerian men, before politely qualifying it with more information about how the warning wasn’t different from the warning the woman also gave regarding other men from her own country. Don’t worry, she’s not American, but that hardly changes a fact: there is a perception out there that makes for good comedy, or malice, that whenever there is an international scam involving emails, there is a Nigerian somewhere close to it. This, to be fair, is rooted in some fact. Between 1985 and 1999, Nigeria was ruled by some of the most corrupt, most morally bankrupt, must brutal military dictators who rendered extinct a thriving middle class. Along with their looting of the country’s coffers, they also rendered to waste the hitherto reputable social conscience, and ethics. A nation that thrived on hard work and equal opportunity turned to one of vanity and hopelessness, and a futile chase of wealth by all means at the expense of dignity replaced the ethics that once made the country the hope of the continent.

By the late 90s, majority of young (and at the beginning, mostly educated) citizens embraced the new opportunities that the internet brought, and to put it to the use best suited for the loneliness and hopelessness that the situation provided on the ground in the country: for crime. Thinking about it now, I doubt that crime was the real intention of the first people to take advantage of the powers of internet communication. I imagine someone mistakenly discovering that from his apartment building in Lagos, he can have a real romantic relationship with someone as far away in the world as Chicago, or Adelaide, or Brisbane. And then, another one discovered an idea that e-relationship could become a profitable venture. I do not claim to know how this began. I can only guess. I was nineteen years old in 2000 when I entered the University of Ibadan as an undergraduate and I had used email for the first time only one year earlier.

So naive was I of this scamming phenomenon that had, by then, become quite lucrative (that every internet cafe had at least one person using the computers there to send scam mails to unsuspecting people around the world) that when I first came into contact with a sender, I thought that my life was at risk. I worked for a few months between January and September of that year in an internet cafe where emails were still first written on paper, then typed onto the computer, and then sent massively. It was like fax, or telegrams. Only a few people had personal email addresses, and those who did still had to have their emails typed out on the computer in the cafe before they logged on to the internet to send them. My job was to get those typing done, and help customers trying to reach their loved ones. One of the customers we had however was a hairy man of around 33, well built, tall and spoke Hausa, English, and pidgin English. All the emails he had me type always began with “I am the nephew of the late General Sani Abacha, the recently demised Nigerian Head of State”. It went on to say how many millions the late General had stashed somewhere and pleaded to the reader of the email to contact him so that they could transfer the money together to some other account, and share it.

For those familiar with Advance Fee Fraud, this is usually the catch. There is a bogus amount of money somewhere, usually very large and tantalizing. All the reader had to do is to show interest in being an accomplice so that the sender can share some of the loot with them. It usually never works out like that in the end, of course. The unsuspecting responder would be asked to send his/her account number, and then some advance fee to “process” the withdrawal of the loot, and then the criminals go for the kill. By the time the responder discovers that there was no loot in the first place, he/she has already committed a large amount of his/her personal funds and will not be getting it back. There are other variants, of course. A man pretends to be in love with a woman he meets in a chat room. He makes her fall in love with him and then he feigns poverty and the woman starts sending money and gifts to him until he decides that he’s had enough. Sometimes he gets her to loan him a large sum of money, and then disappears. The woman then shows up in Nigeria and makes the front page of a newspaper. She’s looking for so-and-so person who she fell in love with. In many cases, the man had used a fake name as well…

Back to the story. At the moment of typing the said emails, the only thing in my mind was that I had finally met my nemesis. Relatives and family members of Sani Abacha were known to be brutal. People had disappeared and many had been shot for opposing his reign as a military dictator. So here I was talking with his nephew and helping him send emails that detail a series of large financial transactions with foreign correspondents. I was knowing too much and my life was about to change for the worse. I would not know until very much later that my fears were unjustified, and that there was no need for me to have immediately started avoiding the man for fear that he would soon want me dead for knowing his secrets. He was most likely not related to anyone relating to Abacha. All he was doing was trying to swindle whoever was stupid (and greedy) enough to respond to the email.

Of course, in the intervening years, I have also realized the very fine line between romantic scams and real love that transcends distance. I met and dated for a few years someone that I met online who has remained my friend and colleague ever since. I have also discovered the very many scams that dot the internet landscape, including ones that trick you into signing up for “free trial” products only to charge you a month later, or ones that tell you that you’re their “50,000th visitor” and try to get you to sign up for offers that you don’t need and that might either cost you, or clog your email bandwidth. There are thousands. Telemarketers call you with polite requests that you provide your address and then sign you up for magazines you didn’t want who send you the check in the mail a few weeks later. Credit card companies put hidden fees in fine prints and surprise customers across the country every day (with a sustained backing by the conservative political right who insist that banking regulations that look out for consumers are “job killing”.). In short, access to the internet and its many possibilities brought about as many negatives as positives.

Today, as it has been even before the internet came, fraud, by very many political names, have taken over the world – from a criminally-minded Nigerian (and non-Nigerian) youths aiming to swindle greedy western businessmen, or thieving marketing gimmicks aimed at the unsuspecting internet user. The “Nigerian Prince” variety however takes the cake, of course, because everyone at one point or the other has received such a mail claiming to be the relative of a recently dead corrupt politician, be it Saddam Hussein or a recently removed one, like Hosni Mubarak. Not all of those emails are Nigerian nowadays, of course. I know for a fact that regulatory efforts by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has made it hard to commit internet fraud in the country and go free. The “product” has been exported to other parts of Africa and the world. That doesn’t mean that the jokes will go away, but that Nigerians will – and should – begin to laugh with it as it goes on. According to Jon Stewart, they now also have Sarah Palin on their side.

First published on KTravula.com

‘Occupy Wall Street’ has been described as a series of ongoing protest demonstrations originating in New York City. These protests kicked off on Sept 17, 2011 and by Oct 9, had spread to about 70 cities all over the world. The protesters, self-named as ‘the 99 percent’ have taken to the streets to publicly declare a fight against all forms of economic inequality, corporate greed and the absence of evident justice post the global financial crisis. Initially triggered in July 2011 by Adbusters, a Canadian based group, the concept was to actualise a peaceful occupation of Wall Street in protest. It is seen here there was a trigger, the sense of a tipping point – “….there was a feeling that, ‘wow things are going to change’….we are going to take these financial fraudsters and bring them to justice…among the young people, there was a very positive feeling…Now, we’re despondent again”, said Kalle Lasn Founder and Editor of Adbusters.

Anyone familiar with the current Nigerian political and economic landscape certainly will perceive obvious similarity in that last statement. For many, at some point, there was the infinitesimal hope for justice to be meted out and corruption tackled squarely, a silent prayer for fiscal prudence and cuts in government overheads, a hope for transparency and accountability, a longing desire to see the implementation of campaign promises. For Nigerians, it becomes almost apt to conclude this with the same phrase “among the young people, there was a very positive feeling…now, we’re despondent again”. Does the similarity of triggers then justify or guarantee a prediction of similar responses?

The Nigerian psyche so far reflects certain features including brevity of memory, especially in the face of transient gratification. Does it not appear as though the average Nigerian, triggered by similar inequalities and injustice, complains and protests for ALL till he gets reprieve for self? Once reprieve is obtained, via that juicy contract or influential office position in Abuja, Port Harcourt or Lagos, it becomes as though the neo-activist within activates an auto system shut down, forgetting ongoing societal and economic issues. In other matters in this regard, what trend do we observe with the cases of the ongoing trial of Hon. Bankole, the alleged injustice to Justice Salami, the ABSU gang rape video? The Nigerian psyche agitates momentarily, then moves on swiftly, relegating past issues to oblivion.

Further examining the Nigerian psyche in the light of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs gives the vivid impression that many or perhaps most Nigerians are at the lower layers of the pyramid, with their foci transfixed on meeting the basic needs of life, what Maslow described as deficiency needs - food, water, power supply, security in all forms, health, friendship and family. Maslow’s pyramid suggests appropriately that unless these basic needs are met, people rarely focus on ‘Being’ needs - self actualisation, self esteem, achievements and problem solving. Drawing inferences, people whose daily attention is totally drawn into meeting basic/deficiency needs will have little or no motivation to ascend to levels of societal or economic problem solving. So, it is very likely that the average Nigerian will devote his energies to provide a roof for his family, ensure a steady supply of water, alternative or backup power supply system, and some form of home and communal security. A nation filled with many of such does not appear to present a compelling cause for ‘Occupy Wall Street’ type protests. Why? People are overwhelmed with struggles to meet basic needs, why should they endanger themselves? They hustle, longing for future prospects, and that breakthrough moment, which will make life much better for them, positioning them above the struggle line. Such individuals are more likely to be engrossed in an ‘occupation’ than the thought of ‘Occupy Abuja’.

These factors that characterize the Nigerian psyche (brevity of memory and the encumbrance of basic needs) portend to be potential terminators to the possibility of an ‘Occupy’ protest happening here.

The antithesis to this reasoning will be to prove and demonstrate clearly that a Nigerian tipping point has been reached. Each time a national event or change seems to suggest such, the pre-occupation with basic needs and the brevity of memory surmount the challenge, fuelling the resilient nature of Nigerians. Is there currently a cause, strong enough, as the transference of presidential powers to Goodluck Jonathan in March 2010, to guarantee another ‘Enough is Enough’ march?