US-AFRICA Summit 2014: An empty rhetoric

US-AFRICA SUMMIT, 2014

Listening to Obama make a fool of Africa and its leaders was the most scintillating highlight of the US-African summit being hosted in Washington DC. Obama opined, and I quote “We don’t look to Africa simply for its natural resources. We recognize Africa for its greatest resource which is its people and its talents and its potential”. While many Africans clapped their hands in approval, some few clever ones knew that this is an empty rhetorical that dominate global economic policies towards Africa. Available historical accounts of US-Africa relation shows the contrary as this article shall elucidate.

To contextualize the US-African summit 2014, one needs to understand that this conference is a direct counter to the increasing economic influence of China in Africa. The US and its allies are genuinely frightened of the rate at which China is making concrete investment and control over Africa’s crude oil and mineral resources.

By 2009, China was already Africa’s main trading partner, surpassing USA. In 2012, China’s trade volume with Africa hit US$ 198.5 billion mark while US’ was only $99.8 billion. That is twice as much trading already and yet China’s trade with Africa is only 5% of its total globe trade. It is estimated that more than 80% of China’s $98.3 billion of import from Africa in 2011 were in minerals, raw resources and crude oil.

China’s trade with Africa has been soaring in the last decade or so, while USA has been meddling in Africa for centuries. Why then is Obama misinforming the world about US interests and presence in Africa as if US is a new entrant in exploiting the continent?

For many centuries, the developed West sustained very unfavourable trade relations with Africa best described as bullied exploitation and economic repression. For the most, the current predicament of Africa and its lagged economic progress is mainly attributable to these centuries of exploitative bullying from the US, UK, France and most of their colonial apparatuses that continue to meddle in Africa’s internal affairs.

Therefore, Obama’s claim that the US looks beyond oil and mineral resources should be treated with the contempt it deserves. The basis of any positive economic relationship with Africa has been hinged on crude oil and raw materials. The US has footprints in each and every country in Africa, stable or unstable. They are there primarily and precisely for economic benefit, not to develop human resources or African infrastructure. Otherwise, Africa would not have been as poor and deficient in all internal aspects to compete favourably in the international markets.

Obama offers US$ 33 Billion in new trade partnerships to ensure that US goods and services gain access to African markets. This is another baloney. One only needs to read John Perkins’ 2004 book: “Confession of economic hitman”, Jeffrey Sach’s  2005 “End of Poverty: economic possibilities for our times” and Health Poverty Action’s 2014 report, “Honest Account? The true story of African billion dollars losses”, to unpack the worthlessness of this Obama’s US-Africa trade package.

Mr. Perkins is unequivocal in his narration of how the US has always used underhand methods such as assassinations, cultivating civil unrest leading to regime change, paying bribe to influential leaders and where possible, supplying arms and protection of crooked leaders to manipulate co-operations of all kinds from any country in the world. 

Perkins provides numerous examples around the world where the US is still involved or where it left tragic footprints in pursuit of its interests. According to Sachs, the true value of American foreign aid that reached the person in Africa in 2002 was only 6 cents after all deductions. 

Both Perkins and Sachs show that most of the money that the US offers to Africa, either as aid for cooperation or grants go directly to US agencies, paying off “expatriates”, deduction for debts owed and financing infrastructure that serves American interests in those countries.

The Health Poverty Action report shows that for every US$ 30 billion in foreign Aid that Africa receives annually, it losses US$192 billions. The money is lost through loan and debt repaying of $46.5 billion. Other losses include $35.3 Billion in tax evasion and other illicit financial flows facilitated through tax havens; $17 billion in illegal logging; $3 billion in remittances; $46.3 billion repatriation of profits made by multinational companies; $1.3 billion in illegal fishing and Africa incurs a loss of $36.6 billion as a result of climate change and $6 billion as a result of brain drain.

We conclude that this summit could be fruitful if Obama announced at least 85% of US debt relieve to Africa; expanded US market access beyond existing mechanisms such as AGOA, Power Africa Initiatives, a declaration to respect African autonomy over its resources and removal of Agricultural subsidies and protective mechanism to inhibit Agro-based imports to the US markets.

END

Evidence now shows it is Africa donating Aid to rich countries

AID DEBATE

Proponents of aid to Africa will have difficulties convincing the world that Africa really need empathy and financial bailout from rich countries. It has emerged that Africa is indeed the continent that is sustaining and aiding the world with its vast resources and potentials. 

A report by Health Poverty Action released recently shows that Africa is receiving US$134 billion in aid every year and it pays out US$192 billions in return to the wealthy nations. This means every year, Africa donates US$58billions to the West. This is a compelling case which illustrates clearly that donor aid is not meant to develop Africa, but to create favorable environment for mockery and subsequent exploitation.

The situation is made worse by African leaders who are positioned as appendages of these Western government’s mechanisms of securing their national interests. The aid arrangement ensures that African interest is subordinate to the realization of ending poverty and the likes of Prof Jeffrey Sachs should not mislead the world that they have magic formula for ending poverty anywhere using foreign aid. 

Even then, the prevailing aid debate is devoid of a critical assessment of the dynamics of supremacy of foreign control using aid in the realization of foreign interests.

It’s a wonder that Uganda with the highest concentration of NGO per capita in Africa would be presented as a success story by the World Bank and donor community. If the Ugandan economy is indeed growing at 5% per annum, how come Ugandans are not realizing the benefits in critical social services like health care?

Foreign aid is a ploy of hoodwinking the populace so as to soften the ground for resource exploitation. Take for instance that all contracts Uganda signs with direct foreign investors are so shrouded in secrecy and yet Donors are not conditioning aid to foster transparency in natural resource exploitation. 

And, this is surprising given the fact that the British government critically condemned the Chinese- DRC US$6 billion resource – for – infrastructure swap, arguing that it was a bad deal, shrouded in secrecy and in bad faith - claiming that the people of Congo were at the short end of the stick.

To a discerning audience it is clear that the Congolese – Chinese resource deal which truly was similar to the Ugandan - Tullow Heritage oil deal in their lack of transparency was criticized by the British Government because the exploiting parties were not Western based companies.

The report by Health Poverty Action, “Honest Accounts? The true story of Africa’s billion dollar loss - 2014” is a must read.  According to Health Poverty Action, there is unconscionable capital drain to the West from Africa in excess of US $58 billion per year which could service Africa’s foreign debts and bilateral loans sufficiently.  After all, the US aid amounts to only 6 cents per African per year according to Jeffrey Sachs (2005, p.310). 

It is surprising that the so-called economists who claim to be so concerned about Africa are not arguing strongly for plugging these drains.

We may appear too hard on proponents of aid to Africa. But coming from countries benefiting from the capital drain from Africa, they may be fighting not only for their own preservation but for the economic interest of their countries. It is in the realization of Western economic interests that aid is used as bait for compliance of Africans to surrender its resources. 

Certainly, if aid was to develop welfare services for poor communities it is difficult to argue for withdrawing it for political convenience. Why would the aid be withdrawn only when anti-homosexuality bill was passed in Uganda but not the draconian Public Order Management Bill which stifles democratic governance?

A simple conclusion is that the discourse of aid is both racialized and politicized. It is in the political realm that we find strong representation of western scholars blaming all the ills that are associated with Western puppets in Africa on Africans. For instance, President Museveni, with all the numerous reports of gross human rights abuses by reputable agencies such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the International Red Cross etc, is rewarded with praises and more military aid.

Foreign aid, good as it sounds, has the soft under belly of foreign control and western interests which its proponents tactfully conceal. If the West really itches to give aid to Africa, let them start off by total debt relief for Africa which remains a thorn in the developmental flesh.

END

President Museveni killed the spirit of debate in Parliament

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

The revelation by Deputy Speaker that MPs are not doing research and therefore not illustrating depth in their debate is not farfetched. In fact I was shocked that this observation even made its way into headline news in the very first place. Anyone who spares time to read the Hansaard would agree that the quality of debate in Parliament has deteriorated too much. Strangely there are some MPs who felt insulted by this glaring truth. In Uganda, truth has no place in society. To attract enmity and hatred at home and abroad, one just has to tell the truth or a semblance of it.

The genesis of the current problem of lack of depth characteristic of this Parliament goes back a couple of years ago. The danger of this problem is amplified by the surging numbers of NRM Parliamentarians in that House. This problem began with the President’s three step instruction that NRM MPs should enter into the house to sleep, wake up and vote. By these orders, President Museveni single handedly killed the spirit of debate in Parliament.

The President’s instructions simplified the job of MPs and rendered Parliament a lame duck branch of government. Anyone now aspires to become an MP, a position with very attractive remuneration, where the earner just sleeps and wakes up to vote. By far, this is the ideological purview of Parliamentary democracy in Uganda which has attracted peasants and scoundrels into it.

The NRM MPs who are the majority in Parliament live in a herded community like the cows at Kisozi Ranch. The tradition of NRM caucus in Parliament is to enforce abeyance to NRM lines as prescribed by its leader – President Museveni. The Chief Whip always is good at issuing directives and threats for MPs with independent minds to gag independent thinking. The plight of the so-called rebel MPs has illustrated clearly that being independent minded in a herded community can lead to a torturous experience.

The herding of members of Parliament deprives that institution of independence, discourages innovation and exploration of current research evidence to inform debates. In the end, the MPs represent the President and his vested interests which are mutually exclusive to those of the struggling electorates. Being an MP is not rocket science and does not require reasoning, research, reading or critical thinking because the formula is already set into three steps – slumber during debate, wake-up when debate is over and vote. Period!

The cumulative effect is that most of the legislative pieces made under the current Parliament are not pro-Ugandans, they are intended to entrench the life Presidency, albeit, at a very high cost. In addition, the use of bribes to sway voting patterns on contentious issues makes the Parliament stink from lack of credibility even to perform its basic oversights function. They bribed Parliament to remove term limits, offer medical treatment favors, loan baits, scholarships etc to soften hardliners and well informed legislators. The legislative arm of government is the most vulnerable in the mighty hands of the Executive.

The current environment in Parliament and the nature of elected representatives that occupy it makes it very hard for informed debate because no one is there to hold them accountable. I have agreed with analyses made by Andrew Mwenda and Timothy Kalyegira on the subject of shallowness and pettiness among the elite class. In explaining the inability of our elite community to produce and reproduce genuinely independent minded progressives, Mwenda diagnosed prevailing “mediocrity” and Kalyegira believes that “generational inferiority complex” is responsible.

In Uganda generally, reading is a disease which is treated more harshly than HIV and majority of the MPs do not know the content of most of their laws that are passed. As the Americans say, if you want to keep your money safe from a black person, keep it inside the book.

END

Museveni created Gays, can eat their Votes too

ANTI - HOMOSEXUALITY

Had it not been for Rt Hon. Amama Mbabazi to threaten the President’s candidature for 2016, the signing into law of the anti-homosexuality Bill had given the president the stead one needed for a landslide. There was a unanimous consensus among Ugandans against homosexuality. Amama Mbabazi forced Kyankwanzi Resolution which diverted attention temporarily from homosexuals.

It is strange how the whole homophobia thing works so well in favor of President Museveni who created the environment for it to fester. The President pounced on homosexuals after realizing that the Speaker of Parliament, Hon Rebecca Kadaga was becoming too popular with her stand against the same.

The truth be said, the emergence of homosexuals in Ugandan society is not a new thing. Like we say, laws and policies emerge to deal with social deviations from mainstreams. There was already provision against homosexuality in colonial era Penal Code Act section 145, which post independence Uganda inherited. This implied that homosexuality existed, and especially in Buganda (Faupel, 1984.,p.9). According to Adrian Jjuko (2014) homosexuality was also acknowledged among the Iteso (Lawrance, 1957), the Bahima (Mushanga, 1973), the Banyoro (Needham 1973) and the Langi (Driberg 1923) but were suppressed.

The sporadic emergence of homosexuals in Uganda in the last decade is attributable to NRM’s liberal economic policies. The emphasis on foreign investment has given rise to tolerance for foreign cultures and practices. Some of these liberal cultures have permeated the social fabrics of our communities, thereby displacing indigenous traditions and cultures especially around public display of sex and sexuality.

The economy of Uganda now lies in the hands of foreigners; Indians, Europeans, Americans, Chinese and so forth. They own malls, hotels, salons, spas and all sorts of recreational activities. Instead of Uganda becoming an industrialized economy, it has become a feminized services provider industry. Most of the merchandise in Uganda are imported, albeit low quality goods from China, UK, USA and South Africa. These goods influence the mind and mediate western cultures’ dominance over ours.

The liberal media fraternity has witnessed a surge of explicit Tabloids, soap opera, reality shows, pornography and misogyny which have profound bearing on our sex cultures. The real problem with Ugandans is that they always like to copy western cultures; the way they talk, walk, wear, drive and have sex are all primed against western practices.

When it comes to sex and sexuality, now Ugandans sing Jamaican songs and want to dance near-naked like Jamaicans. While Caribbean cultures are explicit in their nudity and sexual expressions, most of them use drugs to achieve those when inebriated. Also, most of them expose their bodies to earn a living; in music videos, movies, brothels and so forth. So when Ugandan youths attempt to mimic some of these cultures, they simply alter our cultures in ways that make them appear paid to be gay!

What then emerges as a surge in homosexuality is all about tolerance and acceptance for it which enables some of these youths to discover their innate sexual orientations. Contrary to people who argue that homosexuality is socialized or superficial mannerism, I find that hard to believe. I have not found anyone who is willing to become gay even for money. But here is a bigger challenge; while we condemn homosexuals, we should examine the pattern of sex in Uganda today.

There are men who use their tongue to pleasure the women and likewise, women who perform blow jobs in the process of having sex. These practices are normalized and its status uplifted as the new normal thing. Everyone almost approves of this; Ministers, MPs, MPigs, musicians, pastors and just any man or woman you interact with on the daily basis, eats the human sexual organ - the very organs which produces them. Section 2(1)(a) of the anti-homosexual Act qualifies most of these Ugandans who eat sexual organs as homosexuals.

END

Sustaining inequities in Global Health funding

GLOBAL HEALTH

We have reached in that phase of life where our imagination of foreign cultures, traditions, and certain practices should have changed for good. Technology boom in the last two decades has fused the world, bringing international boundaries and communities to a close proximity. We now have command of what we want to know and when we want it. We know events world over the moment they happen and share our emotions of happiness or empathy of it as global citizens on social media.

With this proximity, one would imagine that we are becoming acquainted with and appreciative of our differences. But it appears that the closer we get, the more we become conscious of persistent global inequities.

It is accurate to say that the major social innovation of our generation is the discovery of the internet. Because of this innovation, the volume of global wealth has increased. The 2013 Credit Suisse Global Wealth report shows that global wealth has increased to a new height, standing at USD 241 trillion, a 4.6% increase from the previous year, representing 68% increment since 2003. And there is great hope that global wealth will increase by 40% to USD 334 trillion by 2018. The CSGW measures and analyses trends in wealth across nations, from the very bottom of the “wealth pyramid” to ultra high net worth individuals.

Despite the increase in global wealth, global inequalities have also expanded. According to World Bank, 95% of the world’s population is surviving on less than US$10 a day. The poorest 40% of the world’s population account for 5% of global income. The richest 20% account for three-quarters of the world’s income. UNICEF estimates that 22,000 children die daily due to poverty. There are over 40 million people living with HIV in the world today and 80% - we are told - live in Sub-Sahara Africa.

These trends reveal that the wealth being created is accumulating in the hands of few individuals, moreover within a specific geographic locations – Europe, Australia, Japan and North America.

With increasing global wealth, there is also increasing global inequality and inequities. Ironically, the countries where much wealth is being accumulated are also countries which lacks in almost every ingredient for the wealth that they accumulate. They do not have sufficient mineral wealth; they suffer from harsh periodic weather conditions and endure some of the worst natural calamities such as hurricanes and so forth.

The poorest areas in the world are also the richest in resources; Gold, Oil, Diamond, Cobalt, Coltan, Uranium, Timber, Grass, Rain forests, fertile soil, great weather, steady supply of solar energy, fresh water bodies, rivers, and exceptional spread of coastal lines, among others.

Over the years, I have thought so hard about the gloom that befell Black Africa since civilization era. The racist global world order has set low expectation for black people. In 2011, the American Republican Party students held a bake sale at University of California, Berkeley. They baked cakes for sale and coloured them according to racial composition of America. For pricing, the White cakes were $2, followed by Asian cakes for $1.5, the Latinos for $1 and the blacks cakes were priced lowest, at $0.75.

Although the cake sale organizers claimed that they were showcasing realities of racism and inequities in American society, they made their point.

The wealth of the world has been distributed in a similar unequal manner. It is reflected in resources and funding for global health. Usually diseases considered to be for white people including its medical research attract large funding. When it comes to funding for diseases and conditions considered affecting predominantly Black communities, the story changes –  always series of debates followed by long unexplained delays until a crisis level is obtained. A clear example is the politics behind securing sufficient funding for HIV/AIDS research and treatment of Malaria, Tuberculosis and other tropical diseases.

END

Disband NAADS to revitalize Rural Economies

RURAL ECONOMIES

In his State of the Nation address, President Museveni reiterated his frustration with the National Agricultural Advisory services (NAADS). This is not the first time that the President has expressed his disappointment with NAADS. The President expressed his frustration with NAADS during the NRM anniversary where he threatened to disband the entire group. And I agree!

NAADS has not only frustrated the President, but the entire Nation. But that is not unusual. Every government agency created to mediate and to deliver services to the country, has failed. This is partly because most of them are created with a mindset that they are a political strategy, not an engine to remove barriers.

Politics, rather than needs, do drive these agencies and the President should pay much attention to this approach. Every government agency is susceptible to mismanagement and corruption. The moment they are set up, their problems begin with the political interference in its administration. Then tribalism and sectarianism creeps in. Trust that in any organization where most of it’s officers are employed for political convenience, it will not deliver. Worse still, when the favor is forecasted on one ethnic base, corruption and the employment of rudimentary traditional ways of handling affairs will be customized. NAADS, like all other government agencies suffers from this disease.

The solution to NAADS is to disband it so as to revitalize Farmers’ Cooperatives. By disbanding NAADS, we shall have done away with this wasteful “middle-man” such that the NAADS resources can be delivered directly to Farmers’ Cooperatives based on specified needs of farmers. It is easier to identify and isolate poorly managed Cooperatives and deal with it than with NAADS.

Further, the National Agricultural Research Organization should be reoriented to meet the direct needs of the farmers. Much of the NAADS money should be used to provide agricultural extension services and direct trainings to the farmers while distribution responsibilities shall be accorded to Cooperatives. Much of the money can be used effectively to improve storage, extend rural electrification and for importation of farm implements for modernization of farming.

The priority of the country right now should be revitalization of rural economies. There are unlocked potentials in rural communities which require some little support in infrastructure and agricultural services. Already in the Countryside the VSLAs are doing very well with very limited external support.

In Pajule, for instance, the average cost to hire a tractor to plough one acre of a garden is between 60,000 - 80,000/= depending on demand, it could be higher. If the farmer has 3-5 acres, the overall cost of using a tractor becomes counter productive in the long run. This is because government tractors which were promised during the 2011 Presidential elections are not accessible to majority of farmers. In fact, I never saw any of those tractors being used anywhere in Pader district during my extensive exploration of the district.

NAADS has also been associated with too much politicking and favouritism. Rural farmers believe that NAADS provides their services to known NRM supporters who are already doing well. Those who are established are given more while those who are struggling are neglected. I believe that government agencies should not be partisan because every Ugandan pays taxes, and at least every Ugandan is party to foreign debts that Uganda accumulates to fund its agencies.

The real deal for the wasted NAADS money will be found when wise investments are made in revitalizing Farmers’ Cooperatives. There proof that revitalization of rural economies is being fundamentally driven by Farmers’ organizations. The government can support this by delivering to the Farmers the tools and facilities they need for their production and ensuring that farmers contribute in shaping the produce markets.

Unfortunately, NAADS is too wasteful and will not deliver as a middle-man between government and rural farmers. There is need for revitalization of Farmers’ Cooperatives and investing in them directly.

END!

Indictment of Millennium Village Projects

 Millennium Village Projects

The debate raging on between Microsoft guru, Bills Gates and the world celebrated microeconomist, Jeffrey D. Sachs of the Earth Institute at Columbia University touches on the core of Global Health. (Refer to Uganda’s The Independent magazine: Why Jeffrey Sachs matter by Bill Gates and; Why Bill Gates gets it wrong by Jeffrey Sachs – May 31, 2014). These debates provide an indictment for the millennium village projects – a brain child of Jeffrey Sachs in his quest to end poverty in Africa. In reality, this debate is an indictment of all foreign interventions that have been conceived from western capitals or institutions and imposed on Africa.

Here, Bill Gates reiterates the critiques of the Millennium Village Project contained in a book by Vanity Fair writer, Nina Munk titled The Idealists: Jeffrey Sachs and the Quest to End Poverty (Published by Random House Inc, NY). The book reads very easily as a narrative in a novel but not as one of those methodological and glossy text books.

The debate between these two philanthropists is much welcome in the world where transparency and imperialist agenda appears transposed. No doubts, both men have used their influence and resources very generously to better the causes of humanity and to liberate Africa from its sorry conditions of persistent hunger, ill-health and poverty. Having dished out over US$28.6 billion in grants payout so far, Bill Gates is perhaps, the most committed person in the world, in this struggle against dehumanizing conditions in Africa and elsewhere – and that is where his leadership in Global Health matters.

Given the much negative evaluation that the MVP is attracting, one needs to fully understand the problems with such programs. While they are ethically sound, well intentioned, meticulously executed and located in places where they are most needed, they fail to deliver on their ultimate aims and objectives and instead exacerbate those same problems they are intended to resolve or rectify!

The MVPs were designed to improve living conditions in villages and to bridge the gap in social services where governments in those countries have failed. MVP went about into populations building health centers, schools, libraries, teaching modern farming methods, providing health education, distributing mosquito nets, drugs, providing immunization services, and extending communication systems in countries such as Malawi, to end isolation, in Dertu (Northern Kenya) where Ms Munk found it to be of no essence, they constructed markets - and did more.

Furthermore, the MVPs are a welcome intervention for theory testing, but it ends at that. The lessons that Jeffrey Sachs and his colleagues should have learned about Africa and such impositions are numerous. The WB/IMF imposed the much dreaded structural adjustment programs which, instead of uplifting African nations from debts, it achieved the exact opposite effect. Thereafter, every program, whether by the EU, US or China imposed on Africa have continued to defy sustainability and collapsed the moment the dollar support is ended.

As scholars and global health leaders, the main areas of concerns before any investment is implemented should be about locals’ buy-in and sustainability. Often, these philanthropists do not pay much attention to any of the crucial factors such as cultural fit of their programs and the fact that human societies are not homogenous, that so each program requires customizing. Failure to include diversity in these theories, from a non western calibration is also the beginning of their failures.

Interestingly, for an economist like Dr. Sachs, he fails to understand the complex nature of poverty, its various tenets and manifestations. In general, he makes it appear that the nature of African poverty has eluded many in the Western capitals.

This explains why Western-prescribed solutions appear to address universal poverty as experienced in the West – deprivation. An influential analysis of rural poverty in Africa was well articulated by Patrick J. Muzaale in the Journal of Social Development in Africa in 1982. In his seminal work: Rural Poverty, Social Development and their Implications for Fieldwork Practices, Muzaale explicates different typologies of poverty and those that are specific to rural Africa. The MVP experience is perhaps the major lesson that Bill Gates and Jeffrey Sachs can use to teach the western world about the complex nature of poverty in Africa.

Lastly, I commend the efforts of Nina Munk. Had she not been diverted with the obsession to critique the MVP too early, she could have done the most relevant work for the success of MVPs. Her initial intentions to capture the voices of the underprivileged recipients of the MVP whose inputs were excluded and yet were crucial. Without these voices, the MVP project will remain experimental and will collapse the moment the MVP dollars dry out like all other projects before it.

END