Democracy alone doesn't bring home the bacon

I WILL borrow from Sir Winston Churchill. He once said that ''our democracy is not the best, but it is the best we have''. In a very polite way, it sounded like he was telling the world that despite faults in the British democracy, the world should learn to live with it.

The British can enjoy the luxury of being subtly or overtly defiant, so can the Americans and any other nation with more than just a little muscle to flex like China. For countries with paper weight, for a leader to take that route may be perilous. The likes of Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti can testify to that.

Zambians went to polls a few days back. The results surprised many, one is forced to believe, after the opposition candidate, Michael Sata, was elected president. As if he too did not believe it, he was quickly sworn in as president of the republic, just in case someone out there had different ideas. It could also be that he didn't want to miss a grand entrance in New York as a head of state. 

Whatever the reason, in a continent that rarely results in an anti-incumbent vote, Zambians are also quickly carving a niche for themselves as a people who are least interested when incumbents croon sweet nothings.

A former police officer, Sata is known to be an abrasive politician. It is said that when he became governor of Lusaka during the administration of Kenneth Kaunda, he made his mark as a man of action with a hands on approach. He cleaned up streets, patched roadways and built bridges in the city.

It has also been reported that earlier in his campaign, Sata accused Chinese mining firms of having slave-like labour conditions and ignoring safety standards and local cultural practices. But it might have been more of campaign rhetoric to garner more votes because, like anyone who understands the pragmatic demands of governing a poor country would have done, he later toned down the rhetoric against the mining firms.

With Chinese companies investing US$2 billion by the end of 2010 in the Zambian economy, the status of Chinese business ties with Zambia, Africa's largest copper producer, grew significantly. As a result of Sata's rhetoric, there were also concerns about the future investment climate in the country after his election victory.

After Sata toned down his rhetoric he did not differ much from the outgoing president, Rupiah Banda. While in the 2006 election China had threatened to cut diplomatic relations with Zambia if Sata was elected due to his criticisms of Chinese mining interests in the country, China is said to have issued a statement welcoming Friday's results.

Why the change of heart, one can never speak for Sata. But it is all too evident; he was going about throwing around his paper weight before he was cut down to size by some real Hercules. That is our democracy. And it makes one wonder, do we really need an expensive democratic process of holding periodic elections just to change faces and continue living in misery?

After all, more often than not they are marred by violence and in extreme circumstance many lives are lost. Hungry folks need food on their tables and not penny-pinching handsome suitors who leave them starving after taking off with their unblemished daughters.  

We go around promising people a better life but when the sun sets we know for sure that we are never bringing home the bacon. One can only wish the best to Sata, perhaps his firebrand style of politics may gain him some sort of leverage when dealing with foreign suitors.

Our democracies are not the best, but they certainly could be better. We need to draw the line between campaign rhetoric and pragmatic demands of governing. Let us stop promising our people what we know we cannot deliver. Giving a people false hopes is very much like blindly sending them to the gallows.

And then we might need to find the audacity to let the suitors know that if they want something from us, then they will have to deal on our terms. But while at it, please don't wake me, because I am enjoying this dream!

It’s sad that we die for less

WHEN tragedy strikes, even the coldest of hearts tend to soften. Well, at least to some extent. When news of the Zanzibar ferry disaster started making the circles, most people I know wanted to get more details.

People mostly wanted to know what really happened and if at all there were any individuals that they might have some sort of relations with who were on board at the time of the accident. The general fear was that many lives would have been lost in the disaster. 

Under such circumstances, everyone wanted to know if a neighbour, a friend’s friend, a distant cousin, an old college or school mate, an old flame or even a foe was a victim. And these were not misplaced fears for many reasons. 

While we are waiting for the findings of the special inquiry to establish the real cause of the accident, one reason for the accident that keeps being mentioned is overloading of both passengers and cargo. This makes one feel the task of the team conducting the inquiry is a mere formality, we all almost certainly know what would be the outcome. 

In fact, four people have already appeared in court charged with negligence following the disaster. Recently I happened to be watching a local television channel where one survivor was narrating what had happened before, during and after the accident.   

He so matter-of-factly stated that the accident might have been averted because there were all signs something was amiss before the ferry set sail. Passengers were complaining that the ferry was overloaded and that some passengers and cargo should be let off but to no avail. 

How and why the ferry was allowed to leave despite all the misgivings and reservations by the passengers one may never come to know for sure. But an intuitive guess is that this practice is commonplace. 

Boat operators don’t really give a hoot what the passengers have to say. But that isn’t strange because they know they can always get away with whatever decision that they make because authorities too do not have the time of day for a passenger’s opinion. 

Those charged with the responsibility of ensuring boats, ships and ferries are secure before setting sail seem to take their duties for granted and as a result operators think and act along the same lines. They are bent on maximizing profits and in the process passenger safety and security becomes secondary, if at all it is taken into consideration.  

While we were coming to terms with events at home, a mine flooded in Wales and killed four people. A few days after the accident, safety experts owned up to the occasion and promised that lessons will be learned from the investigation into the tragedy at a Swansea Valley mine.

The tragedy at Nungwi claimed the lives of over 200 people, according to official figures. But many believe more people perished in the disaster because there were no proper records showing how many passengers were actually on board at the time of the accident. Naturally, one can only be grateful that many lives were saved while still sympathizing with those who lost loved ones. 

But I happened to have had a chat with maritime security and logistics experts who are of the opinion that more lives could have been saved if at all we had in place rescue teams and speed boats on the ready. 

The experts opined that the number of survivors could have been more if the response was quicker because most survivors were found many hours after the accident happened while still alive. They had the will to survive and then there is always Divine Providence when the inexplicable happens. 

Having in place rescue teams with the necessary facilities and equipment may not necessarily avert accidents, but it will surely save lives. And that is what we want to hear from authorities, that they will learn lessons from the tragedy and take action. 

The experts said that there is a huge possibility that many accidents occur in deep seas, especially amongst fishermen, but they go unnoticed in the public eye because it does not claim the lives of many people at once. Plus it might as well pass off as an occupational hazard when a fisherman dies at sea. 

With rescue teams on the ready, many lives of unknown fishermen could be saved as well. After all, whose life is better than that of the next person? Why should others then perish just because they are less fortunate to travel in a dilapidated ferry that should have been grounded years ago?

Since operators of ferries and boats seem to care less about the comfort of passengers, perhaps authorities should ensure that that in itself does not end up claiming many lives. That would be  allowing one’s own kind to die for very little.

In Libya, the morning after was not well thought out

TRUTH to tell, I have never been a great fan of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. I never found his love for grandiosity and uncanny ways of stealing the limelight appealing. His antics were at times, to say the least, not befitting a person of his posture as a world leader.

But I will also give credit where it is due, Gaddafi was no pushover. He stood his ground and made it clear to the world that he was not a puppet of any foreign interests. Perhaps that was his undoing; he pushed too many wrong buttons with his stance.

It is no wonder then the powers that be wanted him out of the way, they just could not be too conspicuous. But when the opportunity presented itself in a golden platter, it was time to go. The rest will be rest to history.

For complicated reasons of his own, Gaddafi also encouraged diversity in Libya. According to recent article in TIME magazine, Tripoli is known to be a racially diverse city, with skin colors ranging from pale to very dark, largely because Gaddafi encouraged such integration.  

But a latent racism festers, along with the hazy rules that only locals seem to understand that distinguish between "good" black people from "bad." The logic follows the lines of Gaddafi's uneven favors, which even in Tripoli often served personal ambitions more than the public good.

The report further states that the line between regime soldier and dark-skinned southerner or migrant worker has grown murkier in the fog of war. Throughout the conflict, rebels have often been eager to offer reporters their proof of foreign fighters in the form of dark-skinned bodies, foreign passports and ethnic charms that they've found along the front lines. 

And in the aftermath, foreign blacks and southern Libyans remain prime suspects, even as rebels sweep pacified neighborhoods of Tripoli. Rebels would time and again produce darkies they arrest as mercenaries solely because of the color of their skins.

If one chooses to blame Gaddafi, it may suffice to state that he may have done more to divide his country's future than to encourage tolerance and respect. But in a country where racial, tribal and geographic mistrust is commonplace, it would take more than a Gaddafi to change attitudes.

And that may well be the handicap that will make the country very difficult to govern after the dust settles. Since rebels took over most of the country there have been incidents of racial intolerance, this will in due time have a spillover effect. Libyans will start prodding at each other because of their tribes and geographic origins.

The sad part is that this will not be the first time that it happens. We have seen it in other countries where America and allies tried their adventurism. The allies have left an insecure Afghanistan and Iraq after ousting those countries’ regimes and the same is looming in Libya.

The need to get rid of Gaddafi was so pressing that filling the vacuum after his ouster was not a matter of substance at the time the fighting started. As they are going through the list of puppets to replace Gaddafi, no one knows how long it would be before Arabs run out of darkies to taunt and start turning on each other just because they come from different tribes.

With all the arms in the streets of Libya following the war, it would be no surprise if the streets of Libyan cities will the most dangerous places to roam about. All of this is because those who helped to start the war never really cared about what would happen to Libyans, but rather what they would get after Gaddafi is out of the way.

As for black Africa, past relations with Libya should remain but a distant memory. I mean what should we expect if red carpets have been rolled for NTC leaders in as far off places as Russia? The killing is done and now even those who did not want to take part in the kill want a share of the spoils. That was well thought out!

Fifty years on, we prefer perms and mascara to greasy overalls

TANZANIA will be marking fifty years of independence at the end of the year. On the outset, political independence ought to mean claim to self rule and determination. But that’s not how it works and it doesn’t take a wide stretch of the imagination to discern that.

We are a poor country, not in terms of what we have but how we live. Freedom in poor countries comes with too many strings attached, leaving very little room to walk in. Under such circumstances decisions are largely influenced by forces from without. That alone is enough to interrupt the growth and development of a poor nation. 

But there are also forces from within at play that disrupt our growth. It is like Catch 22, we are damned if we don’t, we are damned if we do. The only problem here is that we seem to be too gullible and unwilling to change.

We are also very quick to forget where we come from. Many successful Tanzanians today came from poor, ahem, humble backgrounds. Once they make it they tend to develop insatiable appetites for things they never had in their previous lives. We are not firm believers in the greater good.

They become selfish and make public institutions their own private fiefdoms. Corruption and embezzlement of public funds becomes the order of the day. As they go about town looking like American pimps in the seventies, the institutions they are entrusted with are left on their knees. That is us!   

There are examples of poor countries that slithered to prosperity in fifty years. Such countries took bold decisions and worked hard to ensure their implementation. With help from various sources I will use South Korea as a model. 

In May 1961, the South Korean military junta declared what it termed “Pledges of the Revolution”. One of the declarations was that all corruption and government misdeed would be disposed and fresh and clean morality would be introduced.

 Another declaration was that the reconstruction of a self-reliant economy would be priority. The South Korean administration then announced a five year economic development plan, an export-oriented industrialization policy.

Then they set to work on accomplishing their priorities and the result was that the economy grew rapidly with vast improvement in industrial structure, especially in the basic and heavy chemical industries.

Since capital was needed for such development, the regime used the influx of foreign aid, mostly from Japan and the United States, to provide loans to export businesses, with preferential treatment in obtaining low-interest bank loans and tax benefits.

These businesses would later become global multinationals owning numerous international enterprises. They call them chaebol in South Korea, a term often used to mean conglomerate. Through aggressive governmental support and finance, some have become well-known international brand names, such as Samsung, Hyundai and LG. That is them!

It gives one no pleasure to be the bearer of unpleasant news, but the truth of the matter is we have failed where the likes of South Korea have succeeded. This should not be misconstrued to suggesting that Tanzania has not achieved anything in fifty years.

A little introspection may be needed here. Instead of just thinking of celebrating the achievements, we should find the time to ask ourselves what went wrong on the way to heaven. How come we are taking too long to get there?

When the Koreans chose a pragmatic approach to end their problems, we picked fixed ideas and theories that we never took their implementation too serious to begin with so naturally they were doomed for failure.

Better yet, as others sought industrial technology, we opted for mascara, lipstick and perms. We are contented with putting on a cosmetic appearance at any cost. We forget that in due time the aesthetic coating of make-up will wear off and we will go back to being our ugly selves.

In Tanzania, it seems that everyone wants a desk job, their specialized disciplines regardless. Someone shrewdly explained the reasons for such a trend. One is that a desk job is the buttered side of the bread, it is where money can easily change hands and no questions are asked. And the second obvious reason is that field work can only get one dirty, nothing more.

It is no wonder then after fifty years of independence all notable Tanzanians want to be politicians. We don’t like getting all greasy and oily, we love our lipstick and shiny shoes. It is also no wonder then that to outsiders, there can only be two sets of Tanzanians.

One half is made up of thieves and the other half is made up of half thieves, lurking on any opportunity to have their big day. And yes, thanks to us because we brought it on ourselves. The fact that I shall forever remain Tanzanian makes my heart bleed even more, more than many others who may opt to relocate to Somalia, or the whereabouts.