President Obama as seen by the world

A messiah, philanthropist, politician, courageous and a play boy

The 44^th and first African-American President of the United States of America is seen by many from different angles, to represent different things. It could as well be the good, the bad, the ugly and why not, the best.

Ordinary Africans: They see Obama as someone who is expected to use his position to pressure African leaders to stop clinking to power. They also hope he will prevent US and US firms and other western companies and banks from serving as safe-havens for embezzled funds from the continent.

Pan Africanists: They believe Africa needs a rebirth and another wind of change to blow across the continent. They hope Obama not only being an African-American, but, supposedly, passionate about Africa, would use his position as the most powerful man on earth, to destroy neo-colonial ties and help Africa to be able to stand up to its own feet. The colonial cup web is really complicated and very difficult. It will take a strong man and a strong nation like America with the will and ability to destroy it certainly to the disgruntlement of several other “developed” nations.

This is however, daunting and life threatening because; he has to serve the interest of the US first. Many Pan Africanists believe Africa is in shackles today because of the relics of neo-colonial systems which have continued to kill any nationalistic instincts and hunt various countries’ development. Most leaders are still products of the neo-colonial administration and are serving neo colonial interests.

Just as Obama cautioned those who prolong their stay in power through corruption and deceit, many expect him to caution developed countries who use their military and economic prowess to stifle political and economic development in developing countries and institutionalise state corruption through shady contracts and other business deals. People see in him, a man courageous enough and capable to change the tides. It’s just a matter of will.

Moderate Arabs. Obama’s policy of pursuing dialogue before action is likened to thinking before acting. This is well received by many who see in him, a kind of solution to the disturbing Israeli Palestine conflict.

Obama must be bold enough to tell Israel that they have to make major pre 1967 concessions just as well as remind Palestinians/Arabs that they must recognise Israel’s right to exist. Anything short of this, will mal any “sustainable” Middle East peace deal.

Fundamentalists: They say Obama is just a rubber stamp who will not be able to make any change or difference. Some of them see his choice of Rham Emmanuel (Chief of Staff) and Hilary Clinton (Secretary of State) diehard supporters of Israel as a clear indication that US policy towards resolving the Middle East crisis will not change.

Europeans. They consider Obama as a president whose mandate will be more subtle than that of his predecessor.

Some believe Obama is a messiah with a panacea to all national and international problems. Never in world history has a leader of a country been greeted with such euphoria as was the case with OBAMA in various continents

Many see Obama as a philanthropist because as they say, he seems to have the good will and intentions. They see him as someone who will "re-distribute" the wealth not only within US but also out of the US. That is while some equally say he is more socialist, liberalist inclined than the traditionally capitalist America.

Others see him just as any other politician. Politics is a game of interests and politicians hardly respect their words. They constantly use sweet words to cajole people.

A lot more see in him a “player” and a “lover boy”, a handsome guy who can be the target of any woman. They already fear another “Monica Lewinsky” affair in the White House.

Many see him as an incarnation of hope and the dawn of a new era. Swedish newspapers among which, DN asserted this. Others equally see him as just trying to gain attention for his first days in office and will soon change course.

People also see Obama as Mr Realistic, Understanding and Pragmatic. He started manifesting these from day one in office by suspending Quantanamo trials and cutting the huge salaries for White House senior aides. People also want to him to understand that democracy which is America’s biggest product should not be forced on people in the name of freedom. It should be well marketed and left for buyers to decide whether they will go in for it or not. This school of thought argue that some of America’s strongest allies like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Morocco are themselves very anti democracy countries.

Some see him as a star/celebrity and will want be with him all the time, reason why his inauguration attendance was record breaking in US history. Over 2 million people attended.

Whatever be the case, a builder can only be judged on how and what he builds. Time will tell.

President Barack Obama: As pragmatic as idealistic.

Thursday January 20, 2009 entered the annals of history as the day the first ever African American, Barack Hussein Obama was sworn in as the 44 President of the United States of America, something which appeared almost impossible just four decades ago.

Obama in his inauguration speech did not only talk to please his “fans” and supporters but sounded as pragmatic as well idealistic as he briefly addressed both domestic and foreign policies issues. Conscious of the fact that he is taking over a shattered economy and a country whose image has been badly tainted, he said bluntly "Our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions — that time has surely passed,"

As to apportioned blame he emphasised "Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age,"

He however, reiterated that everybody is needed on board for the new beginning "Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and begin the work of remaking America." It was not only a blame game as the celebrated orator cum president urged Americans to choose "hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord"

His appeal for the building of America cut across racial, religious and ethnic lines is a strong appeal to leaders of other countries who have chosen to rule with radical religious believes, and who work solely with “comrades” and the aristocratic class for the impoverishment of the population.

The composition of his cabinet of conservatives, liberals, Republicans and Democrats etc all shows his openness to work with all school of thoughts. This is his strength as well as may be a source of weakness if this openness is not well managed. In the course of listening to everybody he may end up listening to nobody.

Appeal to the outside world

PRESIDENT Obama admitted that America is a relatively richer country and would be ready to help others. However, “help” or extending a hand as such is something pretty rare of pure capitalist countries. It is hope that such help should not be accompanied with strings which will instead leave the receivers more impoverished in the long run.

Talking to foreign leaders he warned “those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West — know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy." It is true that some leaders have taken the blame- game as an excuse or cover note but, this does not cancel the fact that a great portion of problems of the developing countries and Africa in particular, are being promoted from outside, through funny and shady business deals, supporting neo-colonial leaders, suppressing nationalistic instincts directly or indirectly.

A senior US diplomat said “Tsvangirai is too weak and incompetent for us to allow him to be in an inclusive government with Mugabe. He will be completely outmanoeuvred. Tsvangirai is not as strong as Odinga. If he was, we would have allowed him to get into the GNU with Mugabe”. This sounds very funny and may not represent the ideals of a supposedly frantic person like Obama. People with such views should be kept out of his extended team.

That notwithstanding, for a continent whose leaders are a majority relayed-colonial-era-puppets, Obama warned, “those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist," All the leaders Cameroon, Gabon, Chad, Central Africa republic, Equitorial Guinea, Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Togo, Eygpt, Saudi Arabia etc are examples.Democracy should however, never be imposed on people. It should rather be proposed.

As a good politician he expressed the need to end “petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics." However, that is really sweet to hear for; politicians are remarkable for not keeping to their promises.

We are waiting to see the great change for Obama who has not only proven to be very pragmatic but who also sounds idealistic. However, freedom fighter Marti Luther King just as Idi Amin of Uganda had predicted that a black would rule America soon. Many thought they were unrealistic or idealistic too.

Avoid this President Obama

Unlike targeting individuals, the all powerful US has successfully imposed sanctions on regimes which it considers undemocratic or tyrannical. Unfortunately, like the case in North Korea, Zimbabwe, Iran, and Cuba etc this has caused more harm than good to "innocent"citizens.

As Professor Arthur Mutambara President of a faction of the MDC in Zimbabwe says “People’s lives are too important to be used as ineffective political tools and weapons”, . Putting up legislation or effectively applying laws that prevent the embezzlement of funds and starching them in US banks or doing business with it with US firms such as the buying of business shares and real-states in US with doubtful sources of finances from Africa and elsewhere, would help Africa and the world better.

Work has started already.

Pope petitioned over human right abuses and other crisis in Cameroon

The Progressive Initiative for Cameroon known by its acronym as PICAM has urged Pope Benedict XVI to include discussions on human rights, justice, democracy and freedom on his agenda as he visits Cameroon come March 2009.

The Cameroonian, US based Non Governmental Organisation specialised in the domain of human rights and democracy, beckons the Supreme pontiff to “ include discussions on democracy, human rights and the plight of Cameroonians” during his private discussion with the president of Cameroon, Paul Biya.

According to the release available on its webpage and signed by CEO, Eric Ngonji Njungwe, the visit of the pope is not only welcome by the over 3.5 million Catholic Christians in Cameroon, but, the choice of Cameroon for the first visit of the pontiff to Africa, is also perceived with “mixed feelings” . PICAM says the visit could be "blessings to the misconduct and suffering [the Biya government] have caused its people”.

However, PICAM holds that the voice of the pope may not only be heard by the Cameroon government, but, will at least draw world attention on the poverty, corruption, human rights abuses and suffering under which Cameroonians live daily under the regime in place. “An authoritative voice such as yours will draw the attention of the government of Cameroon and will draw the focus of political leaders world wide”, it reads.

The NGO has also posted an online petition to the Pope which has already been signed by several Cameroonians, most of whom have been compelled to remain abroad due to the precarious environment at home. The NGO also acknowledges that the Holy Father has constantly condemned the injustices, violence and conflict in areas like Somalia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, forgetting that such ills also exists in areas considered “peaceful” as Cameroon. Though gravity of situation may not be as in the aforementioned countries, the human right crusader notes that “citizens of Cameroon are routinely subjected to arbitrary arrests, torture and imprisonment where prolonged periods of detained in squalid and decrepit conditions often result to death and disease”.

A senior Cameroonian Catholic cleric once said “the absence of war in Cameroon does not mean there is peace at all”

The PICAM release dating January 15, also affirms in very strong terms that those who protest even peacefully do risk seriously beating and shootings. It would be recalled that in 2005 and 2006, four University of Buea students were killed as they protested for the reduction of fees and in the second incident, as students clamoured against open fraud in the “competitive examination” results to the Medical school in that university.

Still in 2007, a GTC Kumba, student was shot dead as students protested against intermittent power cuts. A similar situation equally occurred in Abong Mbang in the East province. In the same year, a motor cycle rider was shot dead in the North West province as they protested against wanton police harassment.

The peak of the abuses was in February 2008 where trigger-happy government troops in different parts of the country under instructions, opened fire killing 40 people according to government sources and over 200 according to independent sources. Several hundreds were beaten and imprisoned as they took to the streets due to the rising cost of living. At the time, President Biya claimed the, protesters, mainly youths, were being manipulated. But, in his 2009 New Year state of the nation address, he admitted his mea cupa to the fact that the protests were due to the frustration, employment and poverty. In a related development, protests against the modification the constitution to permit Biya who has already ruled for over a quarter a century, from running for another mandate, were also violently suppressed.

PICAM also says it “recognizes that dialogue and engagement of dictators, supported by diplomatic pressure may be fruitful in bringing about positive change.” The NGO notes that though the arrival of the Pope is in prelude to the October 2009 meeting of Africa Bishop, the Holy Father should use the opportunity to pressure Biya.

Benedict XVI would be the second pope to visit Cameroon and the third pontifical visit to the second. Pope John Paul II had earlier visited Cameroon in 1985 and in 1995 during which he baptised Biya’s son. Cameroonians who believe the pope represents good values are urging him not to endorse injustice, poverty, oppression and despair in Cameroon by speaking against it clearly.

Cameroon’s Christian Cardinal Tumi, has often spoken vehemently against such ills, to the extend of being labelled “rebelled and opposition cardinal”. His lastest outing was on New Year Day when he called for embezzled funds to be reinstated to state coffers. Later and meeting Maroua mid January, the bishops of Cameroon also condemned insecurity, bribery, tribalism, impunity and corruption which have been institutionalised in the country by the regime. These ills are what have been described as a crisis and a time bomb in Cameroon

Middle East conflict: Sweden opts for pragmatism

The Foreign Minister of Sweden, Carl Bildt, has made it clear that the best way for durable peace in the Middle East is to end the economic isolation of the already impoverished Gaza Strip. Speaking to reporters in Stockholm after a visit to Middle East as part of an EU delegation, Carl Bildt, reiterated that “You cannot stop the smuggling without ending the isolation policy”

During the press briefing on Thursday January 8, the Swedish top diplomat equally castigated Israel for some of its policies, which he described as morally indefensible. According to a report published in The Local, Sweden’s leading newspapers in English, Israel policy of isolating the Gaza strip “ is in itself not morally defensible, but it is also not politically possible to stop the smuggling because of the extremely strong excitement to smuggle that is baked into the isolation policy”

Israel and its strongest ally, the US, have constantly accused Hamas, which controls Gaza since June 2007, of smuggling weapons through tunnels. These weapons among which are rockets said to be made in Iran and China are used to launch attacks on Israel.

Minister Carl emphasized that when people are over isolated, they will certainly try to “dig their way out” the other way. Carl noted with regrets that the blockade of Gaza Strip, resulting to the acute shortage of food and other basic resources, have pushed people to digging tunnels to transport food as well as to smuggle explosives and other weapons.

He went further, “For every bomb that falls, for every rocket that is shot, for every child that dies, hatred, opposition and tensions are created that we will later have to deal with,"

Sweden is expected to take over the rotating leadership of the European Union later this year and Carl has expressed his wish to see lasting peace in the Middle East.

Since the creation of the state of Israeli in 1948, it has never been at peace with her Arab neighbours. Both parties need to make sacrifices for any meaningful peace.

Impunity and arrogance!

In a related development, the acting President of South Africa, in at major press outing after 100 days in office, regretted that some countries do act with impunity because of their economic or military strength.

In an interview published on January 8, by Mail and Guardian, Kgalema Motlanthe said “….the UN, and the UN Security Council in particular, is in need of urgent reform in order to become more representative of the world’s population. The problem is that if a country has powerful friends on the Security Council they can sometimes act with impunity. All you have to do is listen to the minister of foreign affairs or defence of Israel to know that you are dealing with people who believe they can cock a snook with impunity.”

According to him, just as many leaders of other nations, there is the urgent need to review the issue of veto power in the UN Security. Many of the few countries with veto power have abused such privileges.

“ Yes, because the veto powers enjoyed by some on this council in fact also promote selfish and sectional interests, which is contrary to the collective and principled mandate of the UN…” he said.

In another interview equally published on BBC website, Yigal Palmor an Israeli foreign ministry worker said “Hamas must not be able to re-arm itself, and that the UN resolution "does not provide practical means to create a sustainable ceasefire".

Sweden recently authorised a 10 million Swedish kronor, about $1.3 million of emergency aide for the trouble-ridden Gazans. The suggestion of the Swedish foreign Minister if applied may go a long way to established e “sustainable peace” in Middle East and pave the way for the creation of two independent states, that is, Israel and Palestine. However, Sweden just as the EU, considers Hamas, a terrorist organisation.

The political, economic and military ambitions as well as illusions of several countries have prevented them from making any peace in most parts of the world a reality. They prefer working on statements and at times provocative ones, with virtually no weight. Often, actions are completely neglected and some actions taken, instead stir more conflict.

Terrorist organisations, Liberation Movements and State Terrorism

Is fighting terrorism a non starter?

What has prompted me to write this article are the remarks of the representative of Swedish Migration Board made in Court during a hearing of a case between a demoted Migration employee, Lenart Eriksson and the Migration Board on October 10 in Mölndal, Sweden. Staffan Opitz said bluntly that Hamas should be considered is a “liberation movement”. This may contradict the official position of Sweden and European Union visa a Vis the Movement. But, is Opitz totally wrong to refer to Hamas as a liberation Movement? It all depends on what we define as terrorism or terrorist and from what angle we see it.

Lenart Eriksson. 51, head of an asylum assessment unit was demoted allegedly because he maintains a pro Israel blog. (The Local .se) This was interpreted by some people among whom was his supervisor, Eugene Palmer, as a stand which is incompatible with his job,given that in such a position, private views on such sensitive matters like the Middle East conflict, should not be aired in public. Others also believe it could make Lenart to favour or disfavour some asylum seekers. I think of Palestinian or Arabs. However, he took the case to court and won but, the Migration maintained its decision not to reinstate him, instead, preferred to pay him a little of over 1.2 million Swedish Krona.

Who is a terrorist and who is not. Several freedom fighters have been called terrorists and several terrorists referred to as freedom fighters. But again who are the real terrorists. Any definition of the term depends on our inclinations.

Take a look at these organisations. The Hamas in Palestine, The ANC in South Africa, Moroccan Islamist Combatant, Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta region MEND in Nigeria, Southern Cameroon National Council separatist in Cameroon, Basque Separatist in Spain, Irish Republican Army, The Lord Resistance Army, in Congo Kinshasa, Justice and Equability Movement and the Janjaweed Militia and Sudan, FARC in Columbia, Tamil Nadu Liberation Army in Sri Lanka, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Ku Klux Klan in the USA, Jemaah Islamiya, Moslem brother, others like Al Qaeda, MUJAHEDEN fighters etc. The list is really long.

I have deliberately added some names among which are some in Africa to explain my case. NB. I have not qualified any of the above as a terrorist organisation nor the countries below. When I consulted the wikipedia list of terrorist organisations as claim by various countries and organisations, the first remark was that, the supposed terrorists are mostly from a religious inclination. Should we then kill in the name of God or should we consider others terrorists because of their religious beliefs.

Take a look at these countries, the USA, Britain, France, Portugal, Russia, Israel, Iran, Australia, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia, Burma, Turkmenistan, and any other country you may want to add. What is and who are state terrorists and who are those sponsoring terrorism?

During the liberation war in South Africa, some people branded the ANC as a terrorist Organisation. Yet there were countries supporting the terrorising apartheid regime which had been “publicly” suspended in most international organisations and was under “sanctions”.

In an article published in www.netcomuk.uk/springbk/enemy and written by Sarah, Maid of Albion, the writer in her presentation still qualifies Mandela and the ANC as terrorists citing papers city Boer news, South African Cross, Reality SA etc. She claims Mandela was still defiant in his autobiography. However British conservative, David Cameron in a declaration 2006, distanced himself from former British Premiere, Margaret Thatcher’s policies towards ANC. He said the ANC was not a terrorist organisation, despite the fact that some countries like the USA and other European states branded it as such. It would be recalled that Mandela was removed from USA terrorists list only in 2008.

Many people have resulted to using force in achieving what they have not been able to do with peace but have been branded terrorists. Is that fair, wrong or right? Is struggling to gaining freedom by the barrel of the gun terrorism? Is militating for the destruction of sovereign states or the killing of its people, not pure terrorism?

I want to go far beyond that. What is now manifested as physical terrorism carried out through suicide attacks, hostage takings, open massacres etc are often culmination of frustrations and lost of hope which can be looked at from different angles. Radical religious teachings which seem to dignify the killing of people who may not be of “our faith” is equally crystal clear terrorism

But most importantly, the real terrorists are those who have propelled political, economic, social terrorism through imperialism, exploitation, oppression and domination at the highest levels and by all means. They are the people funding rebels and opposition parties to destabilise governments. They are the people supporting government which do not even represent the will of the people. Some may also want to call those setting confusion in Africa, terrorists, my opinion is not different. They support rebels some of whom have divided their country into factions so as to facilitate the expropriation of natural resources.

In that case, terrorists are not only those who kill in the name of God and liberation. They also include those who slaughter and cause untold pain and agony because of their insatiable desire for economic and political expansions. Are we therefore all terrorists? Supposed terrorists or freedom fighters always used force either, through irrational bombings, invasions and suicide attacks, funding of rebels etc.

Again I see terrorism inextricably link to the issue of race. One race wants to dominate or terrorise the others. It manifestations are within national and international boundaries. Terrorism in the Middle East is deeply racially motivated. Terrorism in the USA, Europe etc has racial connotations. This also applies to those sponsoring terrorists in Africa. It all has racial and economic undertones. That is the bitter truth.

Many have been considered terrorists not really because they are, but because, opinion leaders or state leaders want to them to be considered as such. Today, the qualification of some people as terrorists may not even be a reflection of the views of the majority but those of a few leaders who have successfully and tactfully done so.

I think the best way to counter terrorism which we all hate, is to look at the causes and see how we can resolve them. The root causes of terrorism may even be far from religious. I strongly see political and economic undertones which have culminated today to the spread of terrorism. The desire by others to seek political and economic domination has made others feel marginalised result to “unconventional” mean to achieve their goals which they call, liberation. This does in any way imply that religious extremists are not also responsible for terrorism. Some have hidden under religion to kill and bomb indiscriminately.

If we could just learn to respect others, avoid sowing confusion for political or economic gains, respect the religious beliefs of others and their right to exist, then we must have killed terrorism to a greater extend. Inasmuch as this is not done, fighting terrorism is a non-starter.

MY “WISH”, our CHALLENGES for 2009 and beyond

MY “WISH”, our CHALLENGES for 2009 and beyond.

Some people call it a wish but, I prefer to talk of a challenge. It is a challenge for me to accelerate in 2009, my contribution to human enlightenment, consciousness and knowledge as well as to keep on learning from others.

The greatest problem plaguing the world today is neo colonialism, imperialism by a privileged few, who are so determined to dominate the world in all aspects and make others eternal “slaves”. This has been manifested through horrible exploitation, sponsoring of conflict, terror and horror, and bullying of others especially the “weak”. Were others born to play the second fidlle? I do not think so. We must struggle to position ourselves and not only rely on circumstances but create those circumstances and opportunities.

In a chat with a friend in Belgium, he told me that the world is already too complicated and we just have to dance the dance as it is without challenging or questioning the status quo. I told him if the present status quo was made by man within a very long period of time, it can also be changed by man not necessarily the people who made it, though, also within an even longer time frame.

As a development, international journalist and communicator, I will not only report events as they are. I must go beyond the mere reporting, to give some details that I know, of what might have triggered an event. It is not enough to report that people have been killed or are being exploited. Why and how are they being killed and what can be done to stop such exploitation and massacres? We must only write that in books but talk of it everyday to create the needed awareness.

In a collective way, we can alter the injustice implanted hundreds of years ago. If we believe in it and above all believe in ourselves, we can start now and in another one thousand years to come or so to come, we should have made a better place for many to live in , just as others prepared it for the few enjoying now.

“It does not suffice to believe in change, we must believe in ourselves to effect the change needed". (Agendia Aloysius)

Journalist, development communicator.

Media and the use/misuse of the appellation “International Community”

Media and the use/misuse of the appellation “International Community”

Various media organs around the world operating from their own agenda have always been using the phrase “international community” to accept or negate certain issues and events. It is in most cases made without attributions therefore coming as sweeping statements which may just be reflecting the views of the journalist or the media organ.

It is common to hear, “the International community has condemned US over the aggression in Iraq, the International Community has blamed Hamas for the violence in the Middle east, The international community has condemned the Coup in this or that country , The international community has called on Israel to shun horror and terror in their disproportionate response to the filing of rocket propel grenades by Palestinian militants, the international community has blamed President Laurent Gbagbo and his government for the prolonged conflict in that country, the International community has blamed President Mugabe for the humanitarian crisis in his country. The international community has done this; the international community has done that” etc.

As someone developing a career in international communication, global journalism and international development, I have always asked myself, who is this international community, how are they qualified and quantified and who do they represent?

There are almost two hundred countries in the world. The United Nations which can be described as the largest grouping of countries in the world has 192 members. Some say it does not bring about any unanimity. Others claim that the UN is in itself, undemocratic, therefore, cannot claim to speak for the international community when some members exclusively hold veto power to stifle the development of “rebel” states and leaders.

In my opinion, the media should not only inform, educate, entertained but contribute to development. That is why going beyond reporting, to presenting issues and analysing making fair comments and opening up for discussion is very good. Media must not shy away from its development role, yet indirectly or directly represent the views of their political masters, most of who profess imperialism, domination, oppression etc.

According to Finnish Professor of Communication and Development, Kaarle Nordenstreng, "only the UN General assembly can be said to speak on behalf of the international". He posits that the security council cannot, given that it is not representative enough.

When colonial troops were placed in the middle of Cote D’ Ivoire separating the North and the South of that country in a bid to comfortably arm rebels who had been favoured in a trouble making MACOUSSI peace deal, most radio organs be they the so called global media blamed and keep blaming the Ivorian government saying for example, “the international community has held President Gbagbo for stalling the peace talks”. Who was therefore this international community? Was it France and its allies? The same applies to several countries and situations.

I am therefore really flabbergasted when I hear supposedly “more experienced” and “pace-setting” media organs referring to some countries and their allies as “the international community”. I think the international community should be a mutually inclusive than exclusive thing.

It appears the media seem to have fallen prey to some politicians who are happy with such appellations because in my opinion, I have never read any article quantifying this “international community” by; some, many or most. It is often categorical. In very few cases, the use of the appellation may have been appropriate. This also applies to other appellations as militants. Who is a militant, who is a freedom fighter?

ENS Maroua: Mediocrity versus meritocracy in Cameroon

ENS Maroua: Mediocrity versus meritocracy in Cameroon

While in Cameroon, I was overwhelmed when I heard about the creation of the Advanced Teacher Training College in Maroua. I knew it would create jobs and also happy that it would spur the people of the grand north to be more interested in education.

I was again happy to read the result on the website of the French daily Le Jour. But, I was taken aback, when recently, I checked daily news online, and read that Members of Parliament, for the Grand Nord provinces, were not satisfied with the quota ; 33 percent according to Jacque Fame Ndongo, Higher Education Minister, and 14 percent according to them, accorded to the grand north.

These MPs, according to online reports, then threatened with a strike and called on the Head of State, Paul Biya to cancel the results or admit a considerable number of candidates for the grand north under what is usually called sociological composition of admitted candidates into professional schools in Cameroon.

To my astonishment, President Paul Biya, whom one of his minister recently said that he does not work under pressure, bowed to the pressure from the MPs and not only granted their wish, but, far beyond that, accorded more than the number of places they wanted, thereby giving them a percentage of 60 among the those enrolled this year in various fields.

This leaves many of us really worried. When will mediocrity give room for meritocracy in Cameroon? Is our president a coward? When did the head of state start appointing those who will get into professional schools? Was Biya doing that for the interest of Cameroon or the interest of the Grand North or even his political interest? Has he ever asked himself about the sociological composition in the appointment of says General Managers, Governors, Ministers, and other top level government posts he makes?

Has he, who is preaching rigour and moralisation, forgotten that the said school is expected to train teachers who will thereafter train youths, Cameroon’s future? Has he forgotten that the admission of mediocre students will have a multiplier effect on the number of mediocre Cameroonians in multiple sectors?

In 2006, Anglo-Saxon students in the University of Buea protested against the admission of students to the medical school in that institution who did not even sit in for the written part of the examination. Yaoundé authorities asked soldiers to opened fire on unarmed students, killing two and wounding several others in 2006. Did Biya ask himself thereafter about the sociological composition of those admitted in the school as well as similar school created in the University of Douala? What future is Mr Biya and his accomplices building for Cameroon?

It really puzzles me that in virtually all professional schools in Cameroon, mediocrity and ignominy are now the benchmarks. Half baked nurses in the name of doctors are trained in CUSS and these guys end up taking a lot of souls consciously or unconsciously. The problem may not be even with the training as such, but, with the calibre of students admitted there.Most of those admitted are not qualified. Just as in other professional schools in Cameroon, ENAM, EMIA, POLICE, and ASMA/ESSTIC etc.

I have always said that if Biya were to rigorously fight corruption, let him give room for meritocracy. This is because, if people were to get into the public service by merit, the degree at which they take or give bribe in the course of their duties may be minimised to the highest level. The public service will then be filled with hard working and the right people who will be able to transform our country. Everything being equal, Cameroon will be “an eldorado” in the next 20 years if such measures are implemented.

Mr Biya and co, please could you guys give room for meritocracy? Where are you driving our country to? There is the urgent need to stop this thing of appointing people as students in professional colleges who do not merit it.

Unfortunately too, this is merely another manifestation of the evils of our country; appointed MPs who do not even represent the will of the people but that of the political masters, appointed governors who ruled the people with colonial fists and who are there to rig elections with all impunity, and an appointed president who is there to serve neo-colonial interest and that of a few protégés in the country.

Agendia Aloysius

Scandinavian countries want Mugabe’s resignation

Current situation aggravated by pride

Scandinavian countries including Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden have added their voice to calls for the President of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe to resign.

In a statement released Friday, December 19, and endorsed by the Foreign Ministers of the said countries, and highly circulated in Nordic media outlets, the latter, accused Mugabe of being responsible for the current impasse and “grave humanitarian situation” in that country.

According to them, there is need to put “….an end to the misrule of Robert Mugabe and of the disrespect for democratic principles and human rights - which are core issues underlying the Nordic engagement and support for the liberation struggles in southern Africa,".

The Nordic countries reputed for their peaceful nature, believe the government of Zimbabwe is responsible for what they described as the “tragic situation in the country”

The call of these countries comes on the heels of that of the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who initiated the move. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, George Bush of USA, the Kenya Prime Minister, Raila Odinga, the President of Botswana and a handful of others have made semilar calls.

However, the South African Regional grouping, SADC, has called for restrain and dialogue. This position has also been supported by the African Union and Thabo Mbeki, former President of South Africa, appointed by SADC to mediate in the imbroglio which erupted after Tshangari bowed out of the second round elections on claims that his supporters were being attacked.

Meeting in Yaoundé, Cameroon recently, the Council for the Development of Social Research in Africa CODESRIA also criticised the use of any force as has been insinuated by some western countries.

While supporters of the embattled Zimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tshangari, of the Movement for Democratic Change MDC, accused Mugabe of stalling the talks, supporters of Mugabe and some independent analysts have blamed Tshangari for constantly leaving the talks to consult his advisers who are said to be Britain and USA from whom Mugabe claims to be preventing a re-colonisation of his country.

In an interview with Abou Ammar, a Palestinian Masters Global Journalism student in the Orebro University Sweden, he described Mugabe as a hero who is painted evil by Western government and media. According to him, the west has dramatised the situation in Zimbabwe and are determined to crucify Muagbe. He regretted that Al Jazeera television which shows “good things” about Zimbabwe and Mugabe is not received in most homes in Africa.

Robert Ngu Ngomesia, a Master graduate in Computer Engineering says “the West are against Mugabe and not necessarily against the Zimbabwean people”. According to him, Mugabe should step down for the sake of the country. He however stresses “even though Mugabe is a strong fighter, let him think of his people now and step down.”

Robert holds that the sanctions on Zimbabwe have missed the target and “we are in a situation where neither Mugabe nor the West will want to be dragged in the mud” he says. While the West wants to maintain sanctions, Mugabe too wants to hang on and defy them. “The issue at stake now is pride” Roberts concludes.

Njang Joseph, a PhD student in USA describes Mugabe as a “bad guy like most African dictators” who should go but, he emphasizes that, for African countries to accept the use of any kind of force, will be the worst mistake ever, for any violence will spill to other countries in the region.

Mugabe, a long time friend with the West became an enemy when he began the redistribution to black Zimbabweans, of formerly exclusively white-owned farm land. The former had been deprived of most fertile land during the colonial era. The redistribution which was described as disorganised was speeded when Britain refused to continue funding it as had been agreed during the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement which paved the way for the independence of Zimbabwe in 1980, with Robert Mugabe as its pioneer president.

Mugabe says Zimbabwe is his and only the people of Zimbabwe will put him down. “Let Britain be for the British and Zimbabwe for Zimbabweans” he said during a rally of his ruling ZANU-PF party recently.

By Aloysius Agendia

Is military intervention needed in Zimbabwe?

Is military intervention needed in Zimbabwe? What is presently doing the rounds in some news media and fora is the declared wish by some countries to wage war on Zimbabwe so as to “liberate” the people of that country from the pangs of what has been described as a dictatorial regime. Some are for, others against. Where are you? Meeting in Yaoundé, Cameroon on December 10, a group of African intellectuals attending the 12 congress of the Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa CODESRIA in very strong terms condemned any use of force in Zimbabwe. “.....We, the undersigned African scholars, are greatly concerned about threats of military intervention in Zimbabwe, ostensibly in the name of human rights and for humanitarian purposes.” They however, recognised the political impasse in the country but prefer diplomacy and appreciated the efforts of SADC because “…military intervention in Zimbabwe will militarise the whole of Southern Africa.” They cited DRC and Somalia as failed areas where force has been irrationally used with disastrous consequences. I may add Iraq. The document is signed by Professors Issa Shivji, Samir Amin, and 200 other scholars who attended the 12th Congress of CODESRIA, in Yaoundé Cameron. Who is who to tell a leader of another sovereign country that, time is up for him to leave power. The disaster in Iraq is there for us to see and draw conclusions. Those who have money to sponsor wars and who claim to be so concern about the health of Zimbabweans and other disadvantaged people world over, should have funded and facilitated the purchase and redistribution of the land in Zimbabwe which without mincing words, is the cause of the mayhem in that country today. I have never seen a situation where a group of countries or call them people, have been so united to punished someone they consider "recalcitrant" so as to give warning lesions to any other African leader who may want to “rebel” against the imposed “natural order”; imperialism and domination. Who are those funding the Tshangari(s), the rebels in Niger Delta, Nigeria, the Laurent Kunda(s), the Vincent Oti(s), who were those who funded the Savimbi(s) Jonas and paraded him as a liberator, the Foday Sankos, Samuel Doe, Les Forces Nouvelle in Cote D' Ivoire, who are those sowing confusion in Sudan, Chad, Central Africa Republic, who are those who killed Patrice Lumumba, Sankara, John Garang, Felix Moumie, Ernest Ouandie, Nnamdi Azikiwe.etc??? Who were those who coerced Ahidjo of Cameroon to resign and brought in Paul Biya who continues to serve neo colonial interest? These very people are setting confusion here and there, shipping weapons with "aide" and making us think they care when they do not really care at all. They know so well that a stable Africa will mean a diminished west. Unfortunately, these very people have successfully brainwashed a good number of African “educated elite" who now profess intellectual dishonesty just because they want something to eat. Robert Mugabe may have stayed too long but Morgan Tshangari is no better choice. To an extend, I buy the idea of the think tank who suggested that the better way might be to keep the two, Morgan and Mugabe away from power. But that is difficult still. They both love power. Tshangari‘s tactics have already proven that he cannot govern. He appears to be more of someone who is coming to auction the country back to the imperialists and the poverty creating and aggravating Bretton Woods institution for his personal survival and that of his accomplices. Another powerful wind of change, this time around, a real one needs to blow across Africa. But to achieve this, Africans need to sit up and make self critiques. I have never seen a dictator who organises elections and looses. African problems need African solutions. Inasmuch as we do not realise that, the situation will hardly ever change. Remove Jack and put Sam, in a few years we return to the same situation or even find ourselves in a worst situation. Very unfortunately too, the likes of young die hard African generation leaders like the Thomas Sankara(s), and the Lumumba(s) contrast with another generation like the Compoare(s), Odinga(s), Faure Eyadema(s), and the Joseph Kabila(s) etc. OMG, Safe this continent.