mauritania, still fighting slavery

Mauritania remains the last outpost of the distasteful practice of slavery. Although the government abolished the practice in 1982, little was done to stop the country’s well to do, black and barber alike, from enslaving their own fellow citizens. According to the Open Society Justice Initiative, about 20% of the population- close to 500,000 people – have been enslaved over the last three decades.

This grim situation might soon change. There have been signs of progress in this desert country since its first ever democratic elections in March of 2007. The new government has shown its commitment to ending the vice by passing a much awaited legislation to criminalize slavery in August of this year. This was followed in November by an announcement by the finance minister of a 19 million euros plan for the reintegration of former slaves into the community. The money will be channeled towards poverty alleviation and empowerment of the rural poor who have bore the brunt of this most heinous violation of human rights.

Human rights groups are “very pleased,” with the development but at the same time one wonders why it took so long for the government of Mauritania or other regional organizations to take action and end this most abhorrent practice.

Gaddafi and his new found charm

After spending more than a decade as a pariah state due to its involvement in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing of Pan Am flight 103, Libya is finally being brought back into the fold by Europe and to some extent the United States. The Europeans, led by France, have been the most eager, especially after Libya released a bunch of European medics it was due to punish for their involvement in the infection of young Libyan children with the virus that causes AIDS.

The biggest beneficiary of this new state of affairs has been none other than col. Muammar Gaddafi, Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. Over the past few months, he has made amends with the EU who then agreed to build a prison centre in Libya for the detention of the many illegal African Immigrants who risk their lives to get into Europe every year. This has been seen by many analysts as just a precursor to more aid and closer relations.

Most recently, Gaddafi visited France where he was warmly welcomed by the hyperactive Nicholas Sarkozy. This was even after a junior minister in the French government said that “France was not a doormat on which the Libyan leader could wipe off the blood of his crimes.” According to Reuters, Gaddafi is expected to lead his delegation in negotiations over business deals worth billions of Euros – from a nuclear powered sea water desalination plant to French made fighter jets.

Amid all this, one wonders whether Europe’s new found pragmatism is good or bad for the citizens of the global south. Previously it was the US that had the bad habit of jumping into bed with dictators as long as it was in their strategic interest to do so while the EU remained principled with regard to democracy and human rights. Now that China has jump into the pond and muddied the water, especially in Africa, Europe has also chose to turn a blind eye to human rights violations and poor governance.

I agree that trade with Africa is a good thing and that economic empowerment of African citizens should not be contingent on democratization on the continent. After all, democracies can only flourish in countries with a sizeable, economically well off middle class. All this, however, should not be done with complete disregard for past crimes of some of the leaders involved. Gaddafi may not be as bad at home as Mugabe or Bashir but they all belong to the wrong group of African leaders – iron fisted despots who believe that they have a right to rule for life.

the anc, has the movement outlived its purpose?

There is no question that the ANC, Nelson Mandela’s party, will rule South Africa for many years to come. Like most independence parties on the African continent, the ANC has immense political capital because it claims almost all credit, and rightfully so, for the success of the liberation struggle against apartheid and its evils.

But does South Africa still need the movement-style organization of the ANC? Movement parties are populist, unpredictable and are not suitable for a stable country on the path to economic development. Post-apartheid South Africa needs not a movement party but a party driven by issue oriented democratic ideals. If the country is to realize economic growth and social stability the ANC has to put its house in order and embrace institutionalized internal democracy and transparency.

South Africans should be watchful of the populist politics that is driving the upcoming ANC elections – which will effectively choose their next president. Jacob Zuma, a man who has appeared in court on corruption and sexual offense charges and who has no formal education is poised to clinch the party chairmanship from the embattled Thabo Mbeki. Zuma’s only credentials are that he feels the mood of the crowd and panders to their dissatisfaction with Mbeki’s rather lackluster performance on issues of wealth redistribution and tackling of the aids disaster.

To some extent this is all Mbeki’s fault. His presidency has not met the needs of the largely poor party masses and their vote for Zuma will be nothing but a protest vote against him (Mbeki). Zuma does not represent change. He has no concrete plans for wealth redistribution to the black majority or to tackle social evils like high crime and the country’s astonishing HIV infection rate. He is a man who is on record to have said that his only form of protection after he had had sex with an HIV positive woman was to take a quick shower.

Hopefully the ANC delegates at the upcoming congress will see the light and settle for a compromise candidate that is not as polarizing as either Mbeki or Zuma. But if the party chooses to continue wallowing in mindless populism, the main casualties will be the South African people.