Iran isn’t the only nation advancing its nuclear capabilities in recent years. In 2019, the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), which banned intermediate-range land-based missiles, citing alleged Russian violations and China’s non-involvement. The US is also its nuclear arsenal, with to deploy nuclear weapons in more NATO states and proposals to extend its to Taiwan.

Russia, too, has intensified its nuclear posture, expanding nuclear and updating its on first use. In 2023, the nation in the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which limited US and Russian-deployed nuclear weapons and delivery systems. In 2024, it stationed in Belarus. Russia and China have also deepened their , setting China on a path to rapidly expand its arsenal, as nuclear security collaboration with the US has steadily over the past decade.

The breakdown of diplomacy and rising nuclear brinkmanship among major powers are heightening nuclear insecurity among themselves, but also risk spurring a new nuclear arms race. Alongside Iran, numerous countries maintain the technological infrastructure to quickly build nuclear weapons. Preventing nuclear proliferation would require significant collaboration among major powers, a prospect currently out of reach.

The US detonated the first nuclear weapon in 1945, followed by the Soviet Union in , the United Kingdom in , France in and China in . It became evident that with access to uranium and enrichment technology, nations were increasingly capable of producing nuclear weapons. Though mass production and delivery capabilities were additional hurdles, it was widely expected in the early Cold War that many states would soon join the nuclear club. Israel developed nuclear capabilities in the , India detonated its first bomb in and South Africa built its first by . Other countries, including , , , , and , pursued their own programs.

However, the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), enacted in 1968 to curb nuclear spread, led many countries to abandon or dismantle their programs. After the end of the Cold War and under Western pressure, Iraq its nuclear program in 1991. In a historic move, South Africa voluntarily its arsenal in 1994. Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine the nuclear weapons they inherited after the collapse of the Soviet Union by 1996, securing international security assurances in exchange.

Nuclear proliferation appeared to be a waning concern, but cracks soon appeared in the non-proliferation framework. Pakistan conducted its first in 1998, followed by North Korea in , bringing the count of nuclear-armed states to nine. Since then, Iran’s nuclear weapons program, initiated in the 1980s, has been a major target of Western non-proliferation efforts.

Nuclear ambitions in the Middle East, Asia and Europe

Iran has a strong reason to persist. Ukraine’s former nuclear arsenal might have deterred Russian aggression in 2014 and 2022. Elsewhere, revolutionary Muammar Gaddafi, who Libya’s nuclear program in 2003, was overthrown by a NATO-led coalition and local forces in 2011. If Iran achieves a functional nuclear weapon, it will lose the ability to leverage its nuclear program as a to extract concessions in negotiations. While a nuclear weapon will represent a new form of leverage, it would also intensify pressure from the US and Israel, both of whom have engaged in a cycle of escalating sometimes deadly confrontations with Iran and its proxies over the past few years.

An Iranian nuclear arsenal could also ignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Its relations with Saudi Arabia remain delicate, despite the brokered by China. Saudi officials have they would obtain their own nuclear weapon if Iran acquired them. Saudi Arabia gave significant to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, with the understanding that Pakistan could extend its nuclear umbrella to Saudi Arabia, or even the latter with one upon request.

Turkey, which hosts US nuclear weapons through NATO’s , signaled a policy shift in 2019 when Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan foreign powers for dictating Turkey’s ability to build its own nuclear weapon. Turkey’s growing partnership with Russia in could meanwhile provide it with the enrichment expertise needed to eventually do so.

Middle Eastern tensions are not the only force threatening non-proliferation. Japan’s renewed friction with China, North Korea and Russia over the past decade has intensified Tokyo’s focus on nuclear readiness. Although Japan a nuclear program in the 1940s, it was dismantled after World War II. Japan’s , however, remains measured in months. Despite this, for nuclear weapons remains low, given the legacy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where nuclear bombings in 1945 killed more than 200,000 people.

In contrast, around of South Koreans support developing nuclear weapons. South Korea’s nuclear program began in the 1970s but was under US pressure. However, North Korea’s successful test in 2006 and its severance of , and to the South in the past decade, coupled with the of peaceful reunification in early 2024, have again raised the issue in South Korea.

Taiwan pursued a nuclear weapons program in the 1970s, which similarly under US pressure. Any sign of wavering US commitment to Taiwan, together with China’s growing nuclear capabilities, could prompt Taiwan to revive its efforts. Though less likely, territorial disputes in the South China Sea could also motivate countries like Vietnam and the Philippines to consider developing nuclear capabilities.

Russia’s war in Ukraine has also had significant nuclear implications. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy recently to the European Council that a nuclear arsenal might be Ukraine’s only deterrent if NATO membership is not offered. Zelenskyy later his comments after they ignited a firestorm of controversy. Yet if Ukraine feels betrayed by its Western partners — particularly if it is forced to concede territory to Russia — it could spur some factions within Ukraine to attempt to secure nuclear capabilities.

The war has also spurred nuclear considerations across Europe. In December 2023, former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer a European nuclear deterrent. Donald Trump’s re-election in the 2024 US presidential election could amplify European concerns over US commitments to NATO, with France having increasingly an independent European nuclear force in recent years.

Nuclear collaboration

Established nuclear powers are unlikely to welcome more countries into their ranks. But while China and Russia don’t necessarily desire this outcome, they recognize the West’s concerns are greater, with Russia doing in the 1990s to prevent its unemployed nuclear scientists from aiding North Korea’s program.

The US has also previously been blindsided by its allies’ nuclear aspirations. US policymakers underestimated Australia’s determination to pursue a nuclear weapons in the 1950s and 1960s, including covert attempts to obtain a weapon from the UK. Similarly, the US was initially of France’s extensive support for Israel’s nuclear development in the 1950s and 1960s.

Smaller countries are also capable of aiding one another’s nuclear ambitions. Argentina offered considerable to Israel’s program, while Israel assisted . Saudi Arabia financed Pakistan’s nuclear development and Pakistan’s top nuclear scientist is of having aided Iran, Libya and North Korea with their programs in the 1980s.

The slippery slope to nuclear conflict

Conflicts involving nuclear weapons states are not without precedent. Egypt and Syria attacked nuclear-armed Israel in 1973 and Argentina faced a nuclear-armed UK in 1982. India and China have clashed over their border on several occasions. Ukraine continues to resist Russian aggression. But conflicts featuring nuclear countries invite dangerous escalation, and the risk grows if a nation with limited conventional military power gains nuclear capabilities; lacking other means of defense or retaliation, it may be more tempted to resort to nuclear weapons as its only viable option.

The costs of maintaining nuclear arsenals are already steep. In 2023, the world’s nine nuclear-armed states spent an estimated managing their programs. But what incentive do smaller countries have to abandon nuclear ambitions entirely, especially when they observe the protection nuclear weapons offer and witness the major powers intensifying their nuclear strategies?

Obtaining the world’s most powerful weapons may be a natural ambition of military and intelligence sectors, but it hinges on the political forces in power as well. In Iran, moderates could counterbalance hardliners, while continued support for Ukraine might prevent more nationalist forces from coming to power there.

Yet an additional country obtaining a nuclear weapon could set off a cascade of others. While larger powers are currently leading the nuclear posturing, smaller countries may see an opportunity amid the disorder. The limited support for the , in effect since 2021, coupled with the collapse of other international treaties, reinforces the lingering allure of nuclear arms even among non-nuclear states. With major powers in open contention, the barriers to nuclear ambitions are already weakening, making it ever harder to dissuade smaller nations from pursuing the ultimate deterrent.

[, a project of the Independent Media Institute, produced this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Which Countries Are on the Brink of Going Nuclear? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Plaut then goes on to explain the rise of the African National Congress (ANC) in 1912 as a unifying force for black South Africans against the increasingly oppressive white regime. Key figures like Nelson Mandela and Oliver Tambo emerged, advocating for more radical tactics and forming alliances with the . 

The 1960 Sharpeville massacre in which police fired at unarmed protestors after a stray shot from the crowd fired up resistance to the apartheid regime. Many ANC leaders opted for armed resistance, which was utterly ineffectual but led to a crackdown by the apartheid regime. It banned the ANC and jailed its leaders.

After a few quiet years, the 1970s saw a resurgence of resistance, with white students, including Plaut, supporting the formation of labor unions and the United Democratic Front. These organizations, along with international pressure and the ANC’s armed struggle, contributed to the eventual downfall of apartheid. However, the ANC’s tendency to consolidate power and control other organizations came to the fore, raising concerns about its commitment to truly democratic principles.

To its credit, the ANC represented all ethnicities and stood for equality for all. It opposed discrimination and championed democracy. The post-apartheid South Africa has had many challenges, but the values of democracy, rule of law and freedom of expression run strong. The history of a prolonged independence struggle against colonialism makes South Africa resilient and gives us reason for optimism regarding the future.

[Peter Choi edited this podcast and wrote the first draft of this piece.]

The views expressed in this article/podcast are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Making Sense of South Africa’s Rich History appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The BRICS countries argue that the US and its allies have weaponized the global financial system. The dominance of the dollar, and to a lesser extent the euro, in international trade and finance allows the West to impose sanctions that impact countries’ economies deeply. For instance, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the US and its allies froze $282 billion of Russian assets held overseas and cut Russian banks off from SWIFT, a global system for cross-border payments. America also warned other countries’ banks of potential “secondary sanctions” if they supported Russia.

These actions have led several countries to reevaluate their reliance on the US dollar. Central banks around the world, especially in countries at odds with the US, are stockpiling gold and exploring alternatives to dollar-based transactions. BRICS members see this dependency on Western-controlled systems as risky and are eager to reduce it. China, in particular, views reliance on the dollar as a major security vulnerability.

The proposed solution: BRICS Bridge

To reduce dependency on Western financial systems, Russia proposed a new payment system called “BRICS Bridge.” This digital platform would allow BRICS countries to conduct cross-border payments through their central banks without relying on US-controlled networks like SWIFT. The concept borrows elements from a similar system, mBridge, which is partly overseen by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Switzerland, a prominent institution in the Western-led financial order. However, BRICS Bridge aims to challenge that order, offering a financial lifeline to countries facing Western sanctions and creating a more multipolar financial system.

Different visions of global influence

Russia and China are the main drivers behind the push for BRICS reforms, but their motivations differ. Russia seeks to create a sphere of influence that protects its interests and supports its allies through a flexible, transactional approach to international relations. This approach would allow countries to engage with Russia based on mutual benefits without subscribing to Western “normative” values, which Russia sees as biased.

China’s ambitions go further. Rather than just establishing an independent sphere, China wants to rewrite international rules, shaping a world order where multiple centers of power coexist, with China as a central authority. This would give China greater control over global trade, finance, and diplomacy, gradually replacing the US as the primary rulemaker.

Many countries in the Global South support BRICS because they see it as a pathway to a more flexible international environment where they can negotiate deals that directly benefit their economic growth. For example, India has reaped significant benefits from purchasing discounted Russian oil, prioritizing these economic gains despite the moral conflict posed by the ongoing war in Ukraine. In a multipolar world, countries in the Global South could avoid being tied down by Western rules and make independent decisions in their best interests.

However, this freedom comes with risks. Without a dominant Western power like the US to counterbalance rising powers, these smaller countries could find themselves vulnerable to regional giants, such as China, who may impose their will on them by force in the future.

The BRICS alliance reflects a growing dissatisfaction with the current global order. Critics argue that the US-led international system has become ineffective and no longer serves the interests of many countries, leading them to seek alternatives. However, BRICS itself has limitations. Despite its symbolic appeal, it has not achieved substantial progress on key issues like creating a global currency to rival the dollar or liberalizing global trade. The dollar remains dominant, and the influence of Western-led institutions persists.

Even if BRICS doesn’t have the power to immediately reshape the world, its existence signals a significant shift. Countries are increasingly interested in alternatives, showing that faith in the US-led system is waning. The BRICS alliance may lack the cohesion and power to fully realize its vision, but its popularity underscores a global desire for change.

[Anton Schauble wrote the first draft of this piece.]

The views expressed in this article/video are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post FO° Exclusive: Make Sense of BRICS Summit in Russia appeared first on 51�Թ�.

At its most basic, the election repeated lessons from abroad: Over time, parties that lead nations in their fight against colonialism lose their gloss. The Indian National Congress or the Kenyan African National Union are cases in point. When the reality of running a country comes home to roost, voters gradually become disillusioned.

In South Africa, the proportional representation system exacerbated this disillusionment. Voters elect national lists and are deprived of someone to represent their own suburbs, towns and villages in parliament. Further, the low vote threshold allowed dozens of tiny parties to emerge, eroding the vote shares of the once mighty African National Congress (ANC).

South African voters are unhappy, and only of them turned out to vote this year, down from 66% in 2019. Still more dramatically, the ruling ANC dropped to 40.2% from 57.5%. This is the first time that the ANC has failed to win a majority since the implementation of universal suffrage in 1994.

Five parties split most of the votes. Source: Election Commission of South Africa. https://results.elections.org.za/dashboards/npe/

“Doomsday coalition”

The ANC can no longer rule alone. What should it do now? The party has suggestions that President Cyril Ramaphosa fall on his sword and resign — at least for the moment. Ramaphosa and other party higher-ups have been all weekend. The National Working Committee of the ANC met on Monday, followed by the National Executive Committee meeting today.

The choices the party faces are stark. One path would lead to an alliance with the new party of former President Jacob Zuma, uMkhonto weSizwe (MK). The party is so new and so dependent on Zuma’s charisma that it could hardly forge a stable relationship with the ANC. It is also deeply critical of the judiciary and the constitution.

The other possibility for the ANC would be to seek a relationship with the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) of Julius Malema. They are sometimes described as “radical,” but in reality, they combine xenophobia against Africans from the rest of the continent with demands for the seizure of land and wealth.

EFF members at a voting booth in Khayelitsha, Western Cape. Author’s photo.

Either alliance would see an acceleration of capital flight, combined with an exodus of skilled South Africans, black and white. 

“The reality is if we do end up with an ANC-EFF or ANC-MK (coalition) there will be initial market jitters,” Mandisa Zavala, head of asset allocation at financial firm Alexforbes in Johannesburg. Zavala predicted that this could spark an outflow from government bonds and pressure on the currency. The official opposition, the Democratic Alliance (DA), a potential alliance ANC–EFF alliance as a “doomsday coalition.”

A government of national unity?

Alternatively, the ANC could take a completely different direction. Dr. Frans Cronje, chair of the Social Research Foundation, that the ANC really has only one alternative: to seek an alliance with the DA. This would require both parties eating a good deal of humble pie, since they have engaged in vitriolic attacks on each other.

The ANC is strongly statist, arguing that only the government can really run major institutions and redistribute jobs and wealth to the black majority. In reality, this has meant redistributing wealth to the ANC elite, in gross corruption that was termed “state capture” by an . The DA — which has been holding its own — takes exactly the opposite approach. While it believes in state payments to lift the poor out of poverty, it is strongly free-market in its economics. It is difficult to see how the approaches can be reconciled.

ANC supporters in Khayelitsha. Author’s photo.

Perhaps the DA could offer the ANC a “” arrangement. It would allow the ANC to hold the presidency, but would possibly take the influential position of speaker of parliament in return for guaranteeing that the ANC get its budget adopted. Still, the DA would seek other assurances. Many measures would be negotiated bill by bill as they came up for debate.

Such an arrangement could provide South Africa with a degree of stability and a generally centrist governance. This would be in line with the views of the majority, who are mostly Christian and in outlook.

Instead of a confidence and supply arrangement, it is not impossible for the ANC and DA to form a full national unity coalition. However, the DA, as the potential smaller partner, is wary of being forced to compromise too greatly.

DA supporters rally in Cape Town. Author’s photo.

The situation is anything but clear. Many options could be considered before the dust settles. South Africans, along with their neighbors who rely so heavily on their regional economic strength, will be looking on nervously.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Limited Options for South Africa’s ANC After a Devastating Election appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Most reporting is from the cities and urban areas, but a third of the electorate lives in rural areas. I went to Napier, some 170 kilometers southwest of Cape Townhome. This town is home to around 5,000 people.

“I grew up in the days of ‘two doors,’” John October tells me, recalling the days of apartheid. Back then, shops, train stations and official buildings had one door for whites and another door through which people of color would be allowed to enter. They were bitter times for people like October , who was classified as “colored,” of mixed racial ancestry. He stands in front of a wall of family photographs explaining what he had to deal with over the years. Some are of weddings and births, others sports, but many show him sitting on committees where he served after the end of official discrimination in 1994. October was a councilor for the ANC in Napier from 2006 to 2011.

John October revels in his councilor days. Author’s photo.

October was also a postman. “The ANC came to see me because they couldn’t win Napier,” he explains. “But I knew everyone.” He is immensely proud of his achievements in office. October drives me around, showing the health centre, library and school that he campaigned to get built. Housing was perhaps his proudest achievement. He shows me the 250 homes that he pushed for in what is called “Smartie-town” — after the multicolored sweets, because of the brash colors the houses were painted in.

Related Reading

Why South Africa’s Poor Vote for the Now Corrupt ANC

October has retired from politics and now looks somewhat wistfully back, but without regret. He worries about his people, who still have to cope with overcrowded houses, poor education and endemic drug use. “Times are hard, but what can you do?” he says, with a broad smile. October won’t say how he will vote, but he is clearly not impressed with the ANC government’s delivery.

Napier is not Cape Town

Napier, like all South African urban areas, still bears the scars of apartheid. People of color live in one part of the town and whites in another. There is no law for this, but prices of property and differentials of wealth and income take their toll, even though there are some signs of change. 

This is a small town that attracts people who want to leave the big cities to seek a quieter life and an alternative lifestyle. Nelis Singels is one of them. He moved with his wife and two children to Napier after giving up a profession in conservation to pursue his passion for art. A skilled ceramicist and sculptor, he has a gallery on the high street, which is where we meet.

Nelis Singels poses with his art. Author’s photo.

“The ANC are playing the race card to win votes,” he tells me. “They make promises just to get people to the polls. But after the election what will happen?” Key services such as electricity and have failed across the country, and there are fears that they will fail again as soon as the election is over. Singels loves Napier, where his family can thrive. He won’t be voting for the ANC or its main rival, the Democratic Alliance (DA), which runs this town and the Western Cape in which it is situated. He worries about budget cuts for the town, which relies on grants from the central government. “I want someone who will look after the interests of my people,” he explains. As a white Afrikaner, identity is still as critical as any other factor for him.  

I meet Karen Donald in a busy café that serves the passing trade as well as locals. She’s a warm, bubbly woman, and our conversation is repeatedly interrupted as she greets people coming and going. Donald is a DA councilor for Napier. Their authority has won plaudits for running a non-corrupt, efficient administration. That’s something of a rarity in South Africa, where local governments have either collapsed or are delivering few services to their people.

Councilor Karen Donald is a personable lady and approachable by all.

Donald is anything but complacent. “How do I get government ministers to take any notice of our bridge?” she asks. “It’s in a terrible condition and needs repairs.” The bridge was a victim of local floods, but getting the resources and expertise to get it mended is no easy task.

It is just one of the issues confronting the town. It may look inviting and charming to visitors passing through, but it has real problems. There is a large shanty town, which houses the growing African population which arrives from across the country and the continent, hopeful for jobs, which this province has managed to provide while others have failed.

Related Reading

South Africa Now Faces a Pivotal Election

The DA may get the credit for running efficient administrations, but it has many critics. Parties have mushroomed, and both the governing party and the opposition have seen their vote shares eroded. The DA may win in towns like Napier, but across the nation, it looks unlikely to increase its vote share much beyond 23%. 

A coalition government is likely to emerge after this election. Coalitions have been administering a rising number of local governments across the country for some years. Many have proved to be unstable and prone to collapse. The people of quiet towns like Napier enter this year’s election with more than a little apprehension about their political futures.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post A New Political Order Is Dawning in South Africa’s Towns appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The former speaker is not alone in facing justice. Lonwabo Sambudla — the former chief executive of the African National Congress (ANC) Youth League’s financial arm and, perhaps more importantly, a son in law of Jacob Zuma, South Africa’s President between 2009 and 2018 — was before a court attempting to to his three luxury vehicles. Sambudla wanted to hold on to a Bentley, a Ferrari and a Rolls-Royce despite the fact that he was apparently unable to pay for them.

The ANC elite plundered state resources

The two incidents above are just a snapshot of the quagmire into which the ruling ANC elite has descended into. The depth of corruption and cronyism were revealed in stark detail by a government led by Justice Raymond Zondo. Its reports revealed how the South African state has been effectively “captured” by the ANC elite.

As the BBC , the commission detailed in over 5,000 pages how the elite plundered state resources.

The evidence revealed how ANC leaders, including former and current government ministers, allegedly participated or encouraged looting at a massive cost to the country.

This included crippling the country’s revenue service, bringing the national carrier South African Airways to its knees, looting the agency that runs the country’s passenger railways, and interfering with the public broadcaster, the SABC.

The secret service was also weakened through the appointment of senior spies who prevented investigations from taking place at the behest of Zuma and others who were seen as close to him.

“The blurring of lines between the ANC and the state was laid bare, party interests were prioritised, crucial government departments were used for the benefit of individuals, resulting in manipulation and political influences,” said South African political analyst Dr Mcebisi Mdletyana.

The political price of “state capture”

The South African public has long resigned itself to the failure of Eskom, the state electricity provider, to provide an uninterrupted supply of electricity. Power goes out for hours at a time. Sadly, in recent months, water has become equally scarce. Johannesburg, and its neighbouring black suburb of Soweto, have been chronically of water for sometime now.��

This failure of the ANC administration to provide essential public services explains the collapse in support for the party as the lays bare in a detailed analysis. February polling, the third in a series, showed ANC support declining to below 40% for the first time. The foundation provided the following .��

A national survey of voters conducted on behalf of The Brenthurst Foundation has found that the ANC’s support has fallen to 39%, making a coalition government highly likely following the general election in May this year.

The biggest gainers have been the Democratic Alliance (DA), which has risen to 27% from 23% in October last year and Jacob Zuma’s MK party which has 13% of the vote, making it the third largest party with the EFF falling from 17% in October last year to just 10%.

With 33% of the vote, the Multi-party Charter (MPC) coalition (DA, IFP, ActionSA, ACDP and FF+ among others) is just 6% behind the ANC.

Other polling suggests the ANC’s share of the vote will be higher and the electoral outcome is very much dependent on the size of the turnout. Even so, few polls give the ANC more than 50% of the vote. 

Frans Cronje, the director of the Social Research Foundation, overall recent surveys give a sense of where the country is going. “If you average out all the polls done, it’s clear the DA will end up at around 24% … the ANC at around 45%, but after the emergence of the MK Party [of Jacob Zuma], this is down to 42%,” he says.

Certainly, the ANC’s share has been on the . It won 57.50% of votes in the last general election in 2019, down from 62.15% in 2014.��

In South Africa’s proportional representation system and dip below 50% will leave the ANC dependent on political allies. It would be the first time since the National Party won the 1948 election, and brought in apartheid, that a governing party would require an ally. Few doubt the ANC will be the largest party after the May election. The real question is who will be the ANC’s allies in a coalition.

Unstable coalition politics likely at the national level

South Africans are unfamiliar with coalition politics at a national level, but have become all too familiar with them in the country’s provinces and regions. There were 32 regional and local running administrations in March 2024. Many are chaotic and unstable, especially those in Johannesburg, Tshwane and Nelson Mandela Bay.��

The coalitions are often sustained by just one or two votes from tiny local parties who can hold their larger allies hostage. These tiny parties are always threatening to quit or change sides and bring the administration down. How an alliance government might operate at a national level is something South Africans have no memory or experience of. 

These problems come as there is growing international involvement in the election process. In the past, politicians have mobilised social media for political ends. Bell Pottinger, the British public relations firm, after it was exposed for attempting to stir up racial hatred. The firm had been hired by Zuma’s allies.

Currently, the Russians and Chinese are threatening to use in an attempt to keep their ally — the ANC — in power. Karen Allen, who earlier worked for the BBC, the South African situation.

In the current environment, now supercharged with artificial intelligence (AI), Russia is accused number one in information operations, using experience from its international troll farm — the Internet Research Agency. Russia also appears to consider Africa an attractive target, given the weak checks and balances in many of the continent’s fragile democracies.

The Africa Center for Strategic Studies identified 23 campaigns targeting����since 2014; 16 linked to Russia. The Digital Forensic Research Lab����that the “political and social instability caused by influence operations” has ramifications beyond countries’ borders.

Given the tensions and uncertainties surrounding the May 2024 election it will take all the resources of the to ensure that there is a free and fair election. There is a great deal at stake and the future of South African democracy hangs in balance.��

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post South Africa Now Faces a Pivotal Election appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Reacting to the world’s growing concern with the latest development in Israel’s “,” NYT mobilized four of its ace reporters to do some serious investigating. The team managed to come up with a shiny example of what appears to be a thorough to the annoying question of a possible famine in Gaza.

The authors not only identify five distinct causes, but also explain in detail how each of them plays out. Their effort appears to be very thorough indeed, but some may suspect that their list is not complete. Before we look at how to complete it, here are the five clearly identified causes:

1. The land delivery route is complex,

2. Inspections have been onerous,

3. Destroyed roads and strained resources make distributing aid inside Gaza a challenge,

4. Aid convoys are frequently beset by violence,

5. Air and sea efforts are ‘not going to solve the problem.’

Before seeking to delve deeper, let’s have a closer look at the second cause, summed up by the adjective, “onerous,” a word derived from the Latin noun, onus, meaning “weight” or “burden.”

�մǻ岹��’s Weekly Devil’s Dictionary definition:

Onerous:

Containing unnecessary weight, a common strategy employed by bureaucracies in designing and executing their procedures to deny services to deserving citizens, used by Israel in this instance to radically reduce and eventually eliminate altogether the weight of Palestinians, a population deemed by the Israeli government to be an unnecessary burden on Israel’s vibrant democracy.

Contextual note

Speaking of burdens, although South Africa successfully produced the onus probandi or “burden of proof” that convinced the International Court of Justice two months ago a genocide was already plausibly taking place, the Israelis have, since that assessment, knowingly aggravated the conditions that would lead to a generalized famine. They apparently view it as a necessary complement to the past five month’s massively destructive bombing campaign.

Israeli government spokesman Eylon Levy attempted to the existence of a campaign to starve the Palestinians, claiming there was “no limit to the amount of food that can enter Gaza, and in fact MORE food trucks are entering Gaza now than before the war.” For such an egregious lie, he was suspended. The rules of propaganda are such that when the accumulation of visible facts contradicting one’s assertion reach a critical threshold, the person who tells such lies must be sanctioned. Most lies appear as simple exaggerations and can be repeated endlessly. But the most extreme lead to an unacceptable loss of face for a government that counts on controlled level of lying.

NYT has consistently tolerated and often repeated and amplified Israeli propaganda. The clearest example was its on “systematic use of sexual assault” by Hamas in the October 7 terror attack. The paper’s “exhaustive report” published in December that sought to establish a pattern of “mass rape” has since been thoroughly debunked for lack of any solid evidence. The exposure of an act of conscious propaganda led the paper’s editors to “walk back” the unambiguous but false accusation of the article, but not to retract it or suspend the journalists.

Perhaps the humiliation related to the drama of what turned into an internal revolt by NYT staff against that example shoddy “reporting” taught the paper to tread more carefully and stick to verifiable facts. The war in Gaza had turned into a journalistic minefield. That’s one of the unintended effects of going easy on apparent genocide. The paper’s objectivity, which we have long called into question in these columns, was now being impugned both from without and within. Not wishing to fall into the trap a second time in its reporting on violence in Palestine, as famine became the latest of Israel’s  war crimes, NYT wanted to make sure that this time it would stick to facts. That is why it so carefully listed and explained the five causes of suffering in food-challenged Gaza.

Some may have noticed that one cause failed to appear in the list: Israel’s embargo on the entry of all types of supplies, including food. There was even another cause careful observers might see as missing from the list: the IDF’s attacks on the famished crowds queueing for food. Perhaps NYT didn’t bother to list those causes because each could be described in full in just one sentence, whereas the complex causes in the list each require a few paragraphs of explanation.

For the NYT the problem lies elsewhere. Its editorial stance requires that it remain in phase with the White House and the State Department. In this case it distances itself from what seems obvious: a population is on the brink of starvation; it is the consequence of political decisions that most observers interpret as potential war crimes, if not genocide.

But neither the US government nor The New York Times can allow itself to entertain such thoughts. They can offer lengthy explanations about difficult logistics but have no eyes to see the politics. In the words of State Department spokesman Matthew Miller responding to questions from the about Israel’s campaign to starve the Gazans: “We have not found them to be in violation of international humanitarian law, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance.”

The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft’s Executive Vice President Trita Parsi not only sees clear violations on the part of Israel but signals US complicity in the policies that NYT refuses to acknowledge. The US is not a neutral observer. Parsi it in the simplest terms: “The Biden administration is in on it, making sure that the Israelis will get maximum protection to be able to continue this war. And all the administration is doing is trying to reduce the most excessive measures the Israelis are taking in order to reduce the political pressure on Israel to stop.”

Historical note

In this column, we have consistently traced the propensity of The New York Times to produce detailed explanations of events and phenomena that over time have proved false. We followed the episodes over a span of years relating to the newspaper’s commitment to Russiagate conspiracy theory or to the absurdity of Russia’s “likely” responsibility for the Havana Syndrome that poisoned the lives and compromised the health of US diplomats.  How can a newspaper of record consistently either distort or hide basic factual truth? Interestingly, one of their reports provided the answer.

Jeffrey Gettleman, the Pulitzer prize winning author of the NYT article attempting to establish that Hamas had been guilty of systematic rape on October 7, explained why he and his co-author felt it was their professional duty to exaggerate the facts to the point of fabricating a lie. The Intercept that in remarks recently offered at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, “Gettleman dismissed the need for reporters to provide ‘evidence.’” He was even more specific. “That’s our job as journalists”: to get the information and to share the story in a way that makes people care. Not just to inform, but to move people.”

The seasoned journalist is right: if the purpose of journalism is to “move people” and to make them “care”, a journalist should accept the truth that simple facts may sometimes get in the way. Fabricated facts may often prove better at getting the job done. This is especially if the journalist sees a particular nation’s interests as the kind of superior cause the paper’s readers should be prompted “care” for.

NYT has done a good job identifying the interests it cares a lot for. Among the most prominent are: anyone in the Biden administration (and no one in a Trump administration), the State Department’s and the intelligence community’s (no matter which administration) and Israel’s, at all times .

*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of 51�Թ� Devil’s Dictionary.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post The New York Times Prefers Fake Rape to Real Starvation appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Interviewed by Ryan Grim, Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, agreed on the ruling’s historical significance. Stepping back from the evaluation of Israel’s potential guilt, which can only be established when all the evidence is weighed and that may take years, Parsi made another with possibly wider implications. “Senior Biden administration officials,” he noted, “have more or less stopped using the term rules-based international order since October 7.” Law is one thing. It can always be twisted by clever lawyers. Language is another.

�մǻ岹��’s Weekly Devil’s Dictionary definition:

Rules-based international order:

A totemic expression commonly and uncritically used by politicians, New York Times pundits and Western media in general from the late twentieth century until the end of 2023, the moment in history when the general population finally understood that the expression referred to a mythical concept and was typically deployed for devious purposes.

Contextual note

Interviewed by former Fox News host, judge Andrew Napolitano, former British diplomat and Middle East negotiator Alistair Crooke made exactly the as Parsi. “For about three weeks now,” he noted, “we’ve heard nothing about the rules-based order any more… Blinken used to use it pretty well every other day.”

The term has played an interesting role in geopolitics over the past few decades. Ben Scott, writing for The Interpreter in 2021, summarized the history of the term “rules-based order” he abbreviates as RBO. Although everyone seems to agree that the purported rules were initially formulated in the aftermath of World War II, Scott explains that the popularity of the term “RBO emerged in the early 1990s under the shadow of the ‘Liberal international order (LIO)’ – a term that is still much more widely used.”

Historical trends, especially when they concern the language of propaganda, can change very abruptly. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, RBO and RBIO became a dominant meme, easily eclipsing LIO. After all, sending an army across a border blatantly violates an easily perceived rule. In that sense, for Western politicians and the media Putin’s invasion constituted a linguistic godsend.

During his first year in office, US President Joe Biden insisted not so much on rules but on the kind of Manichean distinction Americans love, this time between diabolical autocracies and angelic democracies. That sounded like a convenient way of reducing the world’s geopolitical complexity. It had the advantage of echoing the propaganda of the Cold War. Philip Bump Biden’s obsessive invocation of the distinction in a Washington Post article. Rather than accuse America’s multiple enemies of specific crimes, Biden more conveniently group them all together when he “framed the central tension of the moment as pitting democracy against autocracy.”

Thanks to Putin’s criminal invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the language abruptly changed. Now it was no longer a case of the alleged enemies simply failing to be liberal. Putin was breaking the rules that defined the order. From that moment on, the Biden State Department has tirelessly lambasted not only its enemies for violating the RBIO. But it has also lambasted some of its friends, such as India, for resisting the rules-based requirement of applying US sanctions and embargos on Russia.

Now the language has shifted again. Trita Parsi makes a strong point. The legitimacy of a rules-based order requires that not only explicit laws, but also implicitly understood rules apply to everyone in exactly the same way. In reality it was already clear to most observers that powerful nations have the ability to twist the rules, since they alone have the power to enforce those rules.

Parsi notes that irony of the RBO today. When a nation like the US claims that an accusation of genocide is “meritless” while a duly constituted international court sees it as plausible, the suspicion of hypocrisy appears justified. “There is no consistency whatsoever,” he tells us. “There is no legitimacy or credibility talking about it given how the United States under Biden has acted in the case of Gaza.” It is therefore hardly surprising that the Biden administration’s taste for invoking any kind of rules-based order has seriously waned.

This signals a major quandary. If rules are no longer the litmus test of legitimacy, what guidelines remain to replace the vaunted RBO? The respect of sheer military might? The hallowed tradition followed by so many countries that consists of assuming Washington’s judgment is always just? Or could I be some new form of ideology, such as the one that prevailed during the Cold War when God-fearing capitalism opposed atheistic communism?

Times have changed. None of those principles defining the world order is convincing. For most nations, the problem of behavioral guidelines is further compounded by the increasingly credible prospect of a second Donald Trump term in the White House. Even the European governments – hitherto incapable of undoing their shackles or even admitting they are wearing them – now understand that in Trump’s universe not only are there no rules; there is also no need for rules. One consequence of this has become visible in the unseen tsunami of now unfurling within the brains of European leaders today as they try to envision a future they know they are powerless to influence.

Historical note

After Putin’s invasion of Russia, German chancellor Olaf Scholz launched a personal meme that occupied the headlines, even though it made no clear historical sense. He  invoke the Zeitenwende or turning point. Perhaps he remembered and was trying to emulate the success of Francis Fukuyama three decades earlier when he dramatically proclaimed “the end of history.” In both cases, they got people talking.

Scholz initially used the term to describe a shift in Germany’s geopolitical stance, presumably signifying a break with Germany’s economic romance with resource-rich Russia. But by the end of the year, when the chancellor penned an for Foreign Affairs, the term had taken on a more metaphysical character. He was now invoking “The Global Zeitenwende.” A subtitle followed: “How to Avoid a New Cold War in a Multipolar Era.”

In his article Sholz invoked the idea of defending and fostering “an international order based on the principles of the UN Charter.” Could he have been anticipating the showdown that would take place in the UN’s ICJ? Did he imagine that the UN Charter might be the instrument that would call to order the very US hegemony that Germany was now unconditionally aligned with thanks to his unilateral Zeitewende?

That hegemony has been dealt a serious blow. As an associate Professor at Al-Aqsa University in Gaza, Haidar Eid has every reason to offer a partisan of the court’s ruling. But his comment on its historical significance deserves our serious attention. “With this case, South Africa has put not only Israel, but the entirety of the global justice system on trial. This case is a major turning point for humanity, because it marks the first time in history when a Global South country bravely crossed a red line drawn by the colonial West and demanded its favourite settler colony, Israel, be held to account for the crimes it has long been committing against an Indigenous people.”

Eid is right to call this a turning point. Unlike Scholz he describes the precise historical context. Something in the perception of the relationship between the West and the Global South was already shifting, but now it has made something of a 180° turning.

One question remains. After turning in a new direction that would seem to call for a world order with a new set of rules, can we be certain that powerful forces of inertia already in place will not pivot back in the original direction? When a rules-based order appears compatible with genocide, it may be time for humanity to make sure that such a backward Zeitenwende simply cannot be allowed to happen.   

*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of 51�Թ� Devil’s Dictionary.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Is the Rules-Based-Order in Contempt of Court? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

[G]enocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Since countries engaged in genocide do not publicly declare their real goal, the greatest legal hurdle for any genocide prosecution is to prove the intention of genocide. But in the extraordinary case of Israel, whose cult of biblically ordained entitlement is backed to the hilt by unconditional US complicity, its leaders have been uniquely brazen about their goal of destroying Gaza as a haven of Palestinian life, culture and resistance.

Evidence of genocidal intent

South Africa’s 84-page to the ICJ includes ten pages (starting on page 59) of statements by Israeli civilian and military officials that document their genocidal intentions in Gaza. They include statements by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Isaac Herzog, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, five other cabinet ministers, senior military officers and members of the Knesset. Reading these statements, one finds it hard to see how a fair and impartial court could fail to recognize the genocidal intent behind the death and devastation Israeli forces and American weapons are wreaking in Gaza.

The Israeli +972 Magazine to seven current and former Israeli intelligence officials involved in previous assaults on Gaza. They explained the systematic nature of Israel’s targeting practices and how the range of civilian infrastructure that Israel is targeting has been vastly expanded in the current onslaught. In particular, it has expanded the bombing of civilian infrastructure, or what it euphemistically defines as “power targets,” which have comprised half of its targets from the outset of this war.

Israel’s “power targets” in Gaza include public buildings like hospitals, schools, banks, government offices, and high-rise apartment blocks. The public pretext for destroying Gaza’s civilian infrastructure is that civilians will blame Hamas for its destruction, and that this will undermine its civilian base of support. This kind of brutal logic has been proved wrong in US-backed conflicts all over the world. In Gaza, it is no more than a grotesque fantasy. The Palestinians understand perfectly well who is bombing them — and who is supplying the bombs.

Intelligence officials told +972 Magazine that Israel maintains extensive occupancy figures for every building in Gaza and has precise estimates of how many civilians will be killed in each building it bombs. While Israeli and US officials publicly disparage Palestinian casualty figures, intelligence sources told +972 Magazine that the Palestinian death counts are remarkably consistent with Israel’s own estimates of how many civilians it is killing. To make matters worse, Israel has started using artificial intelligence to generate targets with minimal human scrutiny, and is doing so faster than its forces can bomb them.

Israeli officials claim that each of the high-rise apartment buildings it bombs contains some kind of Hamas presence, but an intelligence official explained, “Hamas is everywhere in Gaza; there is no building that does not have something of Hamas in it, so if you want to find a way to turn a high-rise into a target, you will be able to do so.” As Yuval Abraham of +972 summarized, “The sources understood, some explicitly and some implicitly, that damage to civilians is the real purpose of these attacks.”

Two days after South Africa submitted its Genocide Convention application to the ICJ, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich that Israel should substantially empty the Gaza Strip of Palestinians and bring in Israeli settlers. “If we act in a strategically correct way and encourage emigration,” Smotrich said, “if there are 100,000 or 200,000 Arabs in Gaza, and not two million, the whole discourse on “the day after” will be completely different.”

When reporters US State Department spokesman Matt Miller about Smotrich’s statement and similar ones by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, Miller replied that Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have reassured the United States that those statements don’t reflect Israeli government policy. 

But Smotrich and Ben-Gvir’s statements followed a meeting of Likud Party leaders on Christmas Day where Netanyahu himself that his plan was to continue the assault until the people of Gaza have no choice but to leave or to die. “Regarding voluntary emigration, I have no problem with that,” he told Danny Danon, a former Israeli ambassador to the UN. “Our problem is not allowing the exit, but a lack of countries that are ready to take Palestinians in. And we are working on it. This is the direction we are going in.”

Israel is repeating a terrible pattern

We should have learned from America’s failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that bombings and mass killings rarely lead to political victory or success. More often, they only feed deep resentment and desires for justice or revenge that make peace elusive and conflict endemic.

Although most of the martyrs in Gaza are women and children, Israel and the United States politically justify the massacre as a campaign to destroy Hamas by killing its senior leaders. In his book Kill Chain: The Rise of the High-Tech Assassins, Irish journalist Andrew Cockburn how, in 200 cases studied by US military intelligence, the US campaign to assassinate Iraqi resistance leaders in 2007 led in every single case to increased attacks on US occupation forces. Every resistance leader they killed was replaced within 48 hours, invariably by new, more aggressive leaders determined to prove themselves by killing even more US troops. 

But that is just another unlearned lesson as Israel and the United States kill Islamist resistance leaders in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and Iran, risking a regional war and leaving themselves more isolated than ever.

If the ICJ issues a provisional order for a ceasefire in Gaza, humanity must seize the moment to insist that Israel and the United States must finally end this genocide and accept that the rule of international law applies to all nations, including themselves.

While the case will not be decided soon, we might expect a ruling on the provisional measures by or sooner.

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post South Africa Prosecutes Israel for Genocide at The Hague appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Who can forget that Jacob Zuma, the former president, faces of corruption, fraud, money-laundering and racketeering charges but is yet to be tried in court? Instead, the ANC has finally this week that the party lied to parliament when it described a publicly-funded swimming pool at Zuma’s private villa as a “fire pool” installed as a safety feature!

This year’s election will be tougher for the ANC than the earlier ones. Most recent shows that the party will get fewer than 50% of the votes. In South Africa’s proportional representation system, this means that the ANC will have to look for allies to continue governing. One outlier poll suggests that the ANC’s vote share would fall to . 

Rural realities and why the ANC pitch resonates

The black African population, upon which the ANC relies, still turns out and votes for the party, particularly in the rural areas. Under apartheid, the countryside, termed “homelands” or “Bantustans” were dumping grounds for black Africans. They could only legally leave these arrears if they could get one of the rare tightly-controlled permits. Today no such restrictions apply and there has been a migration to the cities. Yet the rural areas are still home to a third of the . 

It is here that the people still vote for the ANC in huge numbers. They have not forgotten the party that led the fight to liberate them from apartheid. The ANC-led government also brought electricity to remote areas of the country, built homes across hillsides and, above all, provided them with social security benefits. Entire families, often unable to find work, came to rely on the small, but vital payments to family members who are disabled or retired. 

The maximum monthly stands at 2 090 rand per month. That is just $122, but it keeps whole families from destitution. Maintaining this pension is vital and the ANC understands this well.

When elections come around, the ANC plays to all its strengths. The party still derives legitimacy from its decades-long opposition to the apartheid government and its previous great leaders, especially Nelson Mandela. However, the ANC’s primary appeal is simple: it warns the poor that they will lose their social security if another party comes to power. This is untrue but truth no longer matters to the ANC in its pursuit of power.

The ANC has employed this cynical tactic over several elections. A by the University of Johannesburg’s Centre for Social Development in Africa (CSDA) carried out in the run-up to the 2014 election indicated that just under half of voters were not aware that the social grants that they received were theirs by right. 

The centre’s director, Leila Patel, said the finding was “worrying” as it meant that these voters — 49% of the respondents — were not aware of their rights. The potential for political abuse is large, given that just under 16-million grant beneficiaries are receiving social grants amounting to R121bn this year. Agriculture MEC [Member of the Executive Council – provincial Minister] in KwaZulu-Natal, Meshack Radebe, for example, said in April that “those who receive grants and are voting for the opposition are stealing from the government”. He said that those who voted for another party should “stay away from the grant”, as if social grants were gifts from the ruling party. In fact, these grants are funded by taxes in order for the government to meet its constitutional obligation to provide social protection.

Summarising , Professor Yoland Sadie described the role of social grants in deciding voter behaviour as important, possibly decisive.  

…social grants can provide an incentive for people to vote for the ANC, since a large proportion of grant-holders who support the party do not think that “they will continue receiving the grant when a new party comes to power.” A majority of respondents also agreed ‘that they would vote for a party that provides social grants’. Therefore, in a situation where one party has dominated the electoral scene for such a long time, and without having the experience of other parties being in power, it is difficult for voters to ‘know’ whether these benefits will continue under a different party in power – particularly if the official opposition has the legacy of being a “White” party.

Opposition tactics in 2024

The electorate has no shortage of parties to choose from in these elections. There will be more than 100 new political parties on the ballot, including ActionSA, the Patriotic Alliance, Rise Mzanzi. For the official opposition, the Democratic Alliance [DA], this will pose a challenge. The DA has its roots in the white, Progressive Party. For many years it fought apartheid with its sole Member of Parliament, putting up doughty resistance to racist legislation. Bitterly attacked by the government for her stand, she won widespread international appreciation for her performance from 1961-1974.

Since the end of apartheid, the DA has gone through several leaders, some of them black. Today is leader of the party and, officially, of the opposition. As a white politician he can (and is) dismissed as representing an ethnic minority. 

The DA has made no secret that it is organising a coalition of opposition parties to challenge the ANC. What Steenhuisen calls the “moonshot pact.”  The ANC has used this to suggest to the electorate that, if elected, the DA will return to the policies of apartheid. ANC national chairperson Gwede Mantashe hinted as much when he Steenhuisen of organising “apartheid parties” to remove the ANC from power. “Steenhuisen is trying the impossible. He’s trying to organise all apartheid parties and parties of Bantustans to form a group that will defeat the ANC,” Mantashe said.

To resist these allegations the DA has now hit back. It is targeting the issue of benefits and grants, using a Tweet.

Steenhuisen is making a well targeted pitch. All South Africans know that their electricity supply has collapsed, the police seldom answer calls for help and unemployment has hit families hard. Will this pitch erode the ANC vote among key constituencies, including the rural communities? It is too early to tell.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Why South Africa’s Poor Vote for the Now Corrupt ANC appeared first on 51�Թ�.

In 2018, Cape Town’s reservoirs were dangerously low. Although authorities severely limited water usage, the city barely avoided “Day Zero.” This would have meant shutting off water to private homes, forcing residents to queue for water rations. Why such a water shortage? South Africa’s water system is crumbling. The system loses liters of water each day due to leaks.

Like South Africa’s, California’s water infrastructure is outdated and in need of repair. California’s reservoirs are largely full now, but there is  only enough water for the state to make it through . To avoid an outcome like Cape Town’s, California needs to start using new technology and smart public policy to ensure the state has enough water.

Managing California’s watersheds

Watershed management will be key to ensuring water from rainfall and snowmelt finds its way to reservoirs, lakes and rivers. Restoring meadows and forests impacted by pollution, development and wildfires will allow for of rainwater and snowmelt. This increases the environment’s ability to hold water.

California’s Sierra Nevada mountains hold a lot of fresh water in their snowpack. The Sierra Nevada Watershed provides drinking water to of the state’s population, but the snowpack is under threat from rising temperatures. The state has was lucky this summer, receiving relatively cool temperatures that left the snow intact. Because California’s watersheds are degraded, they are not able to withstand a great amount of meltwater, so higher temperatures could have caused catastrophic flooding. At the same time, billions of gallons of badly needed fresh water would have been lost.

We may not be so lucky next year, so we need to act quickly. Nonprofits like the Sierra Nevada Conservancy provide for watershed management projects including fire mitigation and land conservation. The state should follow their lead and invest in similar restorations now.

In addition, new, strategically-placed reservoirs like the Alder Creek Reservoir could be game-changers. This proposal would see the reservoir located in higher elevation to better catch snowpack melt and upstream so water would not have to ever be released to prevent risks of flooding.

California should also invest more in below-ground water storage. Previous projects have seen substantial results. In 2016, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti broke ground on the largest underground reservoir in the western US, called the Headworks Reservoir. Since completion, it has stored over gallons of water for LA and helped the city meet state quality levels.

In January 2023, LA received heavy winter rains. The Headworks Reservoir and the newly Tujunga Spreading Grounds rose to the occasion and helped to capture the stormwaters. In fact, the Tujunga Spreading Grounds can capture enough water to supply households per year.

Below-ground water storage contributes immensely to our elastic water supply. Its ability to adapt with the constant ebb and flow of water supply makes it a vital solution to the state’s water scarcity.

Using our water resources more efficiently

Along with capturing more water, we can leverage new technologies to make more efficient use of the water that we have.

Advanced water recycling, or direct potable reuse (DPR), could save enough water for Californian households. Currently, wastewater is treated and then dumped into the rivers and ocean — a day in Los Angeles County alone. As climate change alters rain and snowmelt patterns, this water becomes less likely to find its way back to reservoirs and aquifers. With DPR, wastewater is highly treated and purified to meet drinking water standards before being introduced directly into public water systems.

Recycled water from a DPR system is considered the drinking water available. Texas, Arizona, and Colorado are DPR systems in drought-stricken cities. The State Water Resources Control Board should do the same in California especially in areas hardest hit by drought.

New technologies can also help us efficiently transport water. Using renewable power, we can move water across the state at low cost.

We can also integrate solar panels with aqueducts. A recent study conducted at the University of California, Merced, found that the shade provided by solar panels reduces evaporation by up to 90% annually. California has 4,000 miles of open canals. Researchers that putting solar panels over them could save enough water for 2 million people annually. In addition, the clean power generated by these solar panel networks would also help to power water filtration, maintenance and the movement of water throughout the state. We should seize the opportunity to save energy, money, and water using low-cost solar technology. 

Seeing full reservoirs, flowing rivers, and historic snowpacks feels miraculous after years of drought. But this miracle will turn out to be a mirage unless we update existing watershed management, expand below-ground water storage, support advanced recycling and integrate renewable energy into infrastructure. With a little effort and foresight, California can continue to be not only the Golden State, but a green one as well.

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post New Technologies and Responsible Management Can Solve California’s Water Crisis appeared first on 51�Թ�.

This year’s BRICS summit took place in South Africa from August 22–24. The most important outcome of the summit was the decision to expand the group. will join on January 1, 2024: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, Argentina, Iran and Ethiopia. The original membership has just been doubled and this is a transformative outcome.

Originally, the RIC group was a response to the emergence of a unipolar world following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Then, the BRIC nations, four economically rising powers from three continents, shared an agenda. All four wanted to make the global order more democratic and equitable. When BRICS emerged, these powers wanted a greater role of developing countries in the new world order. At least three of the powers—India, Brazil and South Africa—sought to reform the postwar UN system, including its political and financial institutions. These emerging powers wanted to make the UN the centerpiece of a reinvigorated multilateralism.

End of the unipolar moment

This multilateral approach is becoming all the more important as the world exits its unipolar moment. Although the US remains the world’s leading political, military and economic power, it is no longer able to unilaterally dictate the rules of the international system. It failed to change the Middle Eastern balance of power in its favor by military intervention in the Iraq War or by indirect means during the Arab Spring. The disastrous end of its War on Terror, exemplified by the retreat from Afghanistan, has reduced its international primacy.

The US now sees the need to strengthen its alliances in Europe and Asia to retain its global preeminence. This includes the reinvigoration of NATO in Europe, as well as the alliances with Japan, South Korea and the Philippines in Asia.

The US is pulling the team together as new tensions—with potentially dire consequences for global peace and security—have pitted it against both Russia and China. It has succeeded in getting its European partners to throw their into a common effort against Russia and that China is a systemic threat as well.

Furthermore, the US has used its to the hilt to isolate Russia and cause its economic collapse. Washington has also openly subscribed to the idea of regime change in Russia, a peer nuclear power. It is not only Russia but also China that lies in American crosshairs. The US now sees China as its principal longer-term adversary and is taking aggressive steps to thwart China’s technological rise.

Tensions between great powers are straining the international system. Western sanctions on Russia have been draconian. In particular, the US has weaponized the dollar-based global financial system. The war in Ukraine has also had deeply disruptive effects on the supply of , and to developing countries. The equity of a global order based on rules set by the powerful is now in serious question. This order does not emanate from the collective will of the international community but is defined and determined by the West.

RIC, BRIC and then BRICS were all about multipolarity. These non-Western powers wanted a seat at the top table. Yet the dominant Western powers who champion human rights and democracy are not ready to cede control. In fact, the West imposes its agenda on these powers through championing supposedly “universal values” and does not want to give up its traditional hegemony. Naturally, the BRICS nations oppose this hegemony and want a redistribution of global power.

The West has been locked in a confrontation with Russia and China. Both these powers are responding by expanding BRICS. Hence, they have added six new members to the group. Some of them, like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt and Argentina have historic links with the US. Yet their joining BRICS demonstrates that they are willing to reduce their dependence on the West. These nations want a counterbalance to the US and seek a rebalancing of the global political and economic system, which does not have such punitive costs for transgression.

The inclusion of new members into the BRICS club is telling. Iran is already a of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and close not only to China but also Russia. Iran has long been at loggerheads with the US and is subject to strong . Ethiopia is wracked by and prolonged . Yet the country has made it to the club on the basis of its increasingly close relationship with China.

Clearly, the BRICS expansion sends a loud and clear signal. BRICS has welcomed powers that challenge the US and are close to China and Russia.

What were the criteria and what does BRICS expansion mean?

The entry of new members to the BRICS club raises a key question. What were the criteria?

Were they GDP size or growth prospects or population size or geographic location or regional influence or some combination of these factors? It turns out that, except for energy exporters Saudi Arabia and the UAE, the other new countries face serious economic problems. Egypt is the most populous Arab nation with the largest military in the region. Yet its economy is in an acute crisis. Argentina, the second-largest Latin American country, is in yet another . Their addition does not exactly strengthen the BRICS club economically.

Importantly, no East or South Asian country joined the BRICS club. Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE lie in Asia but are part of the Middle East. Indonesia its candidacy at the last moment. It seems to be betting instead on the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). BRICS is a geographically dispersed club while ASEAN is a cohesive organization with shared interests. External pressure by the US might also have played a role in Indonesia staying away from BRICS.

When it comes to African countries, Nigeria would have been a more credible addition than Ethiopia. However, the country did not apply for membership. Neither did Mexico. Algeria applied for membership but to have gotten in.

Clearly, the expansion of BRICS has been lopsided. Ethiopia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iran are clustered together geographically. Only Argentina seems to stand out.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa : “We have tasked our Foreign Ministers to further develop the BRICS partner country model and a list of prospective partner countries and report by the next Summit.” Yet it is unclear what are the criteria for the expansion. It seems that new members have been admitted to the BRICS club on an ad hoc basis.

While expansion may boost multipolarity, it risks making the new BRICS+ club less cohesive. India and China have deep differences. Their militaries are in a at the border. Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran are not exactly the best of friends. Brazil and Argentina are rivals.

Furthermore, the commitment of various countries to BRICS+ is far from solid. Under Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil had less commitment to BRICS than current president Lula da Silva. Tellingly, South Africa Russian President Vladimir Putin because of its obligations to the International Criminal Court (ICC). Ramaphosa might wax lyrical about BRICS+, but his government is still constrained by Western-made law of The Hague-based ICC.

It remains to be seen how BRICS+ shapes up but it is clear that the addition of new members and prospects of further expansion are an indication of a growing, if inchoate, trend towards multipolarity.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Will the New BRICS+ Be Able to Come Together? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Riding inside the tube is a remarkable existential experience, a moment when life comes into perfect focus, when the immediacy and urgency of the moment is tempered by a feeling of stillness, by an awareness that one is connected to the entire fabric of the universe, riding inside an absolutely silent and solitary tunnel of water, a sense that the past is slipping behind your shoulder, the present is beneath your feet and the future is just ahead, out of reach, represented by a spinning, hypnotic, tumbling tunnel of water just ahead.

Thompson was echoing what surfers from as far back as three thousand years had felt while riding the mighty waves thrown up by the ocean. For some millennia, what has become a glamorized sport, associated with symbols of American excess—expensive merchandise, huge corporate endorsements, bare-chested white men sporting long blonde hair and endless cases of beer—was a sacred and ritualistic act for the ancient peoples of Polynesia, of Peru and of West Africa, one which brought them closer to the heartbeat of nature and in direct communion with their deities.

Surfing as a Religion and Way of Life

Polynesia, which includes islands such as Hawaii, Tahiti, Samoa and Fiji, is widely regarded as the birthplace of surfing. The Polynesians had a profound connection to the ocean, as it played a central role in their lives. Surfing was not just a means of transportation or leisure for them; it was a spiritual practice and a way to connect with their gods and the natural elements.

In Polynesian culture, the ocean was considered a sacred entity, inhabited by powerful deities and spirits. Surfing became a way to honor and commune with these divine forces. It was believed that the act of riding a wave allowed individuals to tap into the energy and power of the ocean, forging a connection between the physical and spiritual realms. The power expressed by ocean waves is what compels surfers even today to go out into the ocean and ride the waves. 

The native cherished a canon of traditional stories and songs that spoke of the noble figures who ruled the land and rode the waves. Hawaiian tradition allows us to date surfing in the islands back to the fourth century.

When the Makahiki New Year season arrived, a time of rest and play that accompanied the arrival of prime winter waves, the art of wave riding, known as , took center stage. It was a shared experience among kings, queens, commoners and even children; everyone embraced the joy of surfing. The significance of surfing for early Hawaiians was so immense that they had a strict prohibition against working or engaging in warfare during Makahiki. Instead, everyone would enjoy a complete three-month break during the winter to foster social connections through play and friendly competitions.

There was, however, a distinction in surfing privileges. Only the royalty had access to the best spots, like the renowned Queens Beach, the exclusive surf break at Waikiki. King Kamehameha himself fondly described the places he surfed with his beloved wife, Kaʻahumanu. These tales wove together Hawaiian myths and legends, where gods and goddesses rode the waves, controlling the winds, tides and swells.

In the spiritual ceremony of surfing, the kahuna, or priest, played a crucial role. The kahuna guided surfers in the sacred task of selecting and constructing wooden surfboards made from trees like koa, ulu or wiliwili. The kahuna made offerings and skilled craftsmen carried out the important task of carving. 

Surfers would seek the blessings of the gods Lono and Laʻamaomao, asking for favorable surf conditions and safe passage. Lono was associated with fertility, rainfall, agriculture and music. He is one of four great gods in Hawaiian mythology along with Kuka’ilimoku (also called Kū) and the twin brothers Kanaloa and Kāne.

Even the powerful goddesses Pele and Hiʻiaka were said to have joined in the art of surfing. Pele, or Pelehonuamea, is the Hawaiian goddess of fire and volcanoes. This fiery goddess molds the hallowed earth, persistently consuming the Big Island with flowing lava and simultaneously giving birth to fresh terrain.

The Celestial Navigators

In addition to its spiritual significance, surfing had practical aspects in Polynesian society. It was a means of transportation, allowing islanders to navigate between islands and explore new territories. Surfing also served as a way to gather resources from the ocean, such as fish and other marine life.

The Hawaiian islands stand as the most remote landmasses on Earth, and when you are there this profound isolation becomes palpable as you float in the ocean. Amidst the cobalt expanse of the Pacific, the mighty deep-sea currents and powerful swells collide with Hawaii’s shallow reefs, exhibiting untamed nature in the form of explosive, barrelling waves that leave you breathless.

These islands are the visible peaks of the submerged Hawaiian-Emperor seamount chain. Over the course of the past 5 million years, molten lava accumulated from beneath the ocean’s surface, gradually cooling and rising to form these volcanic islands, which now rise gracefully above the water’s edge.

Imagine embarking on a daring adventure, sailing away from the shores of a Polynesian island in a magnificent canoe. Your destination? Another tiny island thousands of miles away, nestled in the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean. This immense body of water stretches across more than 60 million square miles, presenting an immense challenge. But here’s the astonishing part: for countless centuries, the skilled Polynesian navigators such voyages without the aid of modern navigation tools. How on earth did they achieve such incredible feats?

Picture 40-person canoes skimming the waves, outrigger canoes gliding through the water and the ingeniously designed multi-hulled canoes powering along boosted by their intricate sail configurations. These took the Polynesian navigators across vast distances. Specialized surf canoes deftly traversed treacherous reefs and enabled their users to take on the thrilling challenge of riding the waves.

Studying the stars, observing the moon and deciphering other natural phenomena, these ancient mariners were able to determine their position and course. This mastery over the elements, allowed them to conquer the vast oceans. 

This extraordinary skill of wayfinding was meticulously passed down through generations of Polynesian sailors. The art of navigation without the aid of modern instruments became an intrinsic part of their heritage. They possessed an intimate knowledge of ocean currents, the intricate dance of wind patterns, the behavior of birds and the subtle signs of nature. It was a testament to their profound connection with the natural world, culminating in their awe-inspiring achievement of reaching the isolated Hawaiian Islands. 

The history of surfing as we know it does indeed originate in Polynesia. However, the story would not be complete without two more chapters: South America and Africa.

Surfing in Ancient Peru

The people of Peru were an ancient civilization that thrived along the northern part of the country’s coast from approximately 100 to 800 CE. Known for their advanced agricultural practices, skilled craftsmanship and unique cultural expressions, the Mochica left a lasting impact on the region.

Among their many achievements, the Mochica people developed a surfing tradition that has captivated historians and enthusiasts alike. At the heart of this tradition were what are now called the , or “little reed horses,” which were paddleboards made of sedge and specifically designed for riding the waves.

The caballitos de totora played a significant role in the lives of the Mochica fishermen. These lightweight, maneuverable paddleboards allowed them to navigate the challenging surf zone with ease, enabling access to abundant coastal waters for fishing, the exploitation of which required exceptional skill and mastery.

Archaeological evidence such as pottery fragments has provided valuable insights into the surfing tradition of the Mochica. The presence of depictions and representations of surfers on pottery pieces from 1400 to 1100 BCE suggests that the Mochica were the earliest known practitioners of wave riding in the world.

The surfing tradition of the Mochica people not only served as a means of sustenance but also held cultural and ceremonial significance. It symbolized their deep connection to the ocean and their mastery over the natural elements. Today, the legacy of the Mochica surfing tradition lives on in , a coastal town in Peru where the caballitos de totora continue to be used by local fishermen. 

Nevertheless, Peru was not the only region where surfing emerged independently from the Polynesian tradition that we know today.

The Wave Riders of West Africa

In his essay “Surfing in Africa and the Diaspora,” Kevin Dawson, an associate professor of history at the University of California, Merced, sheds light on the fascinating history of surfing. According to Dawson, the earliest documented account of surfing dates in what is now known as Ghana.

Across the expansive coastline of Western Africa, spanning thousands of miles from Senegal to Angola, merchants and fishermen independently developed surfing practices. These seagoing populations crafted large surf canoes capable of riding waves as high as ten feet, employing various postures, including standing. Additionally, they used three to five-foot wooden surfboards and one-person surf canoes.

Beyond wave-riding vessels, Africans in these regions also utilized longboards for long-distance paddling. These impressive boards could reach lengths of up to 12 feet. Similar to contemporary surfboard shapers who tailor their boards to different wave types, West Africans developed numerous shapes and designs for surf canoes. Each design was carefully crafted to suit specific waves found in different local regions. Considerations such as wave size, shape, steepness and power informed the creation of these diverse surf canoes.

Just as in Polynesian cultures, the surf canoes of West Africa held a sacred significance. They were meticulously carved from specific trees in a ceremonial manner. These chosen trees were believed to serve as a meeting point of the spiritual and physical worlds, with the spirits residing within them maintaining a continued connection to the water spirits throughout the lifespan of the canoe.

The ocean itself held profound spiritual meaning for these West Africans. It was regarded as a realm inhabited by deities and otherworldly gods, including Mami Wata, a revered ancient West African deity often depicted as a divine, feminine mermaid. These spiritual beliefs further deepened the cultural connection between the people and the water, infusing their wave riding with a sense of reverence for the natural world.

Christian Missionaries Ban the “Heathen” Sport

These ancient cultures, alas, were not to last in their undisturbed form. With the arrival of European explorers in the Pacific, a tragic consequence unfolded: the devastating toll of infectious diseases had claimed the lives of at least 84% of the Native Hawaiian population by the year 1840. Furthermore, the influence of missionaries led to the . They labeled the practice labeling a “heathen” activity. Missionaries sought to convert local populations to Christianity and promote Western values, often deeming indigenous customs inferior or sinful. 

This suppression of surfing was not limited to Hawaii alone, as missionaries also imposed similar bans in West Africa and South America. As a result, the age of colonization witnessed a sharp decline in the practice of surfing, causing it to nearly vanish from the Hawaiian islands and numerous coastal communities worldwide.

The Resurgence of Surfing

The modern resurgence of surfing can be credited to a few visionary individuals who reintroduced the sport to the world. In the early 20th century, Hawaiian watermen like and showcased their surfing prowess to curious audiences in California and Australia, reigniting interest in this ancient art form.

Duke Kahanamoku, a legendary surfer and Olympic swimmer, played a significant role in introducing surfing to a global audience. Duke’s international recognition as an Olympic athlete helped elevate the status of surfing, bringing it into the mainstream consciousness.

Similarly, George Freeth, known as the “Father of Modern Surfing,” played a vital role in popularizing the sport on the American mainland. Originally from Hawaii, Freeth relocated to California and shared his surfing expertise with coastal communities along the Pacific coast. His exhibitions and spectacular wave-riding demonstrations attracted widespread attention and fascination. Freeth’s impact was especially notable in Southern California, where his performances inspired a generation of surf enthusiasts and laid the groundwork for the region’s surf culture.

From this revival, surfing experienced a rapid evolution. Board designs evolved from heavy wooden planks to lighter, more maneuverable materials like fiberglass and foam. The 1950s and 60s witnessed the emergence of surf culture, with surf movies like , bands like the , and a distinctive style becoming intertwined with the sport.

Surfing’s popularity spread across the globe in subsequent decades, reaching iconic surf spots such as Malibu in California, Bondi Beach in Australia and the legendary Pipeline back in Hawaii. Competitive surfing gained traction, leading to the establishment of professional circuits like the . Celebrated surfers such as and became household names, inspiring a new generation of wave enthusiasts. 

Despite the commodification of this ancient art form, legions of devotees flock to remote coastal hamlets around the world to pay homage to the ancient deities, asking for their blessings and hoping to experience the state of absolute freedom that only they can bestow.

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post How Ancient Polynesians Conquered the Pacific on Their Surfboards appeared first on 51�Թ�.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa tried to line up a number of African leaders to travel to Russia and Ukraine in an effort to persuade the two countries to stop fighting. He was joined on the trip by the leaders of Senegal, Comoros and Zambia. Three presidents , one (Uganda) because of a case of Covid, a second (Republic of Congo) because of security concerns and a third (Egypt) for no specific reason.

The timing was not great. Because it recently launched its much-anticipated counteroffensive, Kyiv was not in the mood for compromise. Nor has Russia been exactly diplomacy-positive either, not only refusing to give up the territory it illegally annexed but continuing to try to expand its holdings. The Kremlin has also been busy bombarding Ukrainian targets. Missile attacks on Kyiv even as the African delegation visited the capital city, forcing the members in a bomb shelter.

And then there’s the fiasco at the Warsaw airport.

A second airplane with Ramaphosa’s security team and a number of South African journalists never made it to Ukraine. Stuck at their transit stop in Poland, the airplane sat on the tarmac for hours and hours as the Polish authorities refused to allow the passengers to disembark. A journalist on the trip :

Aboard the stuffy SAA A340-300 plane conditions are starting to resemble a refugee camp. Passengers have not left the plane since around 23:00 on Wednesday, and although water and take away food were delivered, supplies have now been depleted. Unwashed security personnel, SAA staff and journalists have been forced to shape a grim existence on the plane, walking up and down the aisles and using different toilets for distraction.

The head of Ramaphosa’s security detail the Poles of “shocking and racist” conduct. Then came news of 12 rather large containers of weapons on board the airplane that did not have the proper permits. The weapons were reportedly for the use of the security detail. But according to “highly placed South African government insiders,” the boxes “long-range sniper rifles and weapons normally used in serious conflict.”

Wait, what? A peace delegation bearing gifts of war?

Okay, it was a large security detail of 100 people, and maybe they thought they’d be plunged into the thick of war. Or perhaps the weapons were somehow connected to South African arms dealer Ivor Ichikowitz, who was in organizing the initiative. Although the South African government has been quite close with the Kremlin—ditto Ichikowitz—it likely supplied Russia with any arms after its invasion of Ukraine. But arms dealers can make as much from a negotiated peace—supplying both sides of the ceasefire line—as they can from a continued war. Maybe those boxes were simply a sneak peek.

A Canadian Perspective on Ukraine, Iraq and Afghanistan

After more than 24 hours on the tarmac, the plane eventually returned to South Africa, with those 12 crates of weapons. It’s a shame the journalists on board never had a chance to accompany the Ramaphosa contingent, particularly when it arrived in St. Petersburg for a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In Russia, Ramaphosa was able to deliver his opening remarks. But before the other African leaders could speak, a clearly unhappy Putin interrupted to lecture the group with his usual talking points. Then the live feed , and there are no independent accounts of what happened next.

There’s the fog of war. But there’s also the equally dense fog of diplomacy.

Meanwhile, in Beijing

As the African delegation was wrapping up its meetings in Russia, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken was conducting a series of sit-downs in China, including a 35-minute confab with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

On the face of it, the meeting was a success for both sides. China and the United States seemed to be putting behind them the incident that had recently divided them: the US shooting down of a Chinese that may or may not have surveilled some semi-secret sites. Xi provided assurances, once again, that China would not send military assistance to Russia. Blinken provided assurances, once again, that the United States doesn’t support an independent Taiwan.

Most important of all, the two sides are again talking. The rest of us look on like little kids who are terrified when their parents go mum and only glare at each other across the dinner table. Yeah, we know that these powerful figures have their disagreements. But we also know how destabilizing and unpredictable a marital dispute can be.

Of course, China and the United States aren’t married. Far from it. Blinken couldn’t even get Beijing to agree to more communication between the two militaries. The warships and airplanes of the respective superpowers continue to jostle one another in areas around China. There is considerable economic competition. With nationalism on the rise on both sides, there is no love between Washington and Beijing.

But there is something remarkable about how the two countries have managed, so far, not to allow the war in Ukraine to turn into a truly global conflict. That has entailed restraint on both sides.

Two Reasons China Can Be a Valuable Partner for Europe

But will it lead to either a just peace in Ukraine or a meaningful US-China détente?

What did the Africans propose?

In its initial discussions around talking points, the delegation from Africa considered various quid pro quos to offer Russia and Ukraine. to Reuters, which viewed the document, it included

a number of measures that could be proposed by the African leaders as part of the first stage of their engagement with the warring parties. Those measures could include a Russian troop pull-back, removal of tactical nuclear weapons from Belarus, suspension of the implementation of an International Criminal Court arrest warrant targeting Putin, and sanctions relief.

When Ramaphosa presented the plan in Russia, it contained 10 rather anodyne points. On the most contentious question of a Russian pullback, the list fudged the issue by noting simply that “the sovereignty of states must be respected.” Neither side found this language useful. Zelensky insisted on the precondition of a withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine’s sovereign territory: not only the land seized in the 2022 invasion, but also the Donbas and Crimea that were occupied in 2014. Putin found the plan so off-putting that he pulled the plug on the live feed of his meeting with the African delegation, but only after he presented his side of the story: that Ukraine and the West had started the war and the invasion was defensive in nature.

Ramaphosa was undeterred, that “this initiative has been historic in that it is the first time African leaders have embarked on a peace mission beyond the shores of the continent.” After decades—centuries, really—of Europeans beginning and ending wars in Africa, it is indeed refreshing for Africans to weigh in on a European affair. But it’s a shame that this first peace mission was such an obvious failure.

The World Presses to End the War in Ukraine: Can the US Agree?

For one thing, the trip was poorly planned, as the embarrassing standoff in Warsaw demonstrates. The Poles that they held three consultative meetings with the South Africans where they explained exactly what paperwork was required. The crates of weapons were a surprise.

Second, South Africa is not exactly neutral. Ramaphosa’s party, the African National Congress (ANC), has with Russia, a carryover from the days when the government in Moscow was at least putatively left-wing. South Africa has benefited from arms shipments, (modest) trade relations, and political support from Putin’s government. It enjoys a higher profile because of its membership, with Russia, in the BRICS formation (along with Brazil, India, and China). In February, South Africa Russia and China for naval exercises in the Indian Ocean, tellingly on the first anniversary of the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Ramaphosa boldly attempted to trade on his country’s ersatz neutrality to expand its global reputation and possibly, just possibly, secure concessions that could benefit the warring parties and, in the case of boosting food exports, African countries as well. But if anything, the trip undercut South Africa’s reputation—as well as Ramaphosa’s personal brand, which is already at a low ebb because of various scandals. The media commentary in South Africa has been biting from virtually all sides. “Shambolic peace mission did us no favours,” the headline of a Business Live editorial. Or from Mia Swart in The Daily Maverick: “ANC’s kamikaze Russian diplomacy puts SA on the road to economic and reputational ruin.”

What is oft said about “best-laid plans” applies even more forcefully to poorly-laid plans.

Détente along two axes?

China may not be supplying weapons to its erstwhile ally Russia, but it too is not neutral. It’s doing well by the war, boosting its trade with Russia and importing energy at a discount. China’s exports to Russia have risen by an so far this year, compared to the same period last year. Xi Jinping’s well-calculated engagement is a big reason why the Russian economy has not gone completely down the toilet as a result of international sanctions.

Pundits and policymakers seem to agree: China should use its leverage to end the war. The United States is with China as mediator. So is . Even Ukraine future Chinese initiatives.

Why would the Chinese have any more success than the Africans?

For one, China is waiting for the right moment. One scenario is that the Ukrainians kick Russian troops out of most of the occupied territory and then it’s China’s job to deliver the hard news to Putin: negotiate a face-saving deal or else. In a second scenario, the Ukrainians manage only to regain a small fraction of the occupied territory and then it’s China’s job to deliver the hard news to Zelensky: negotiate a deal that establishes some ambiguous sovereignty over the Donbas, the Crimean Peninsula, and the land between them.

What Now is the Future of Ukraine: Korea or Yugoslavia?

Neither scenario, alas, would be particularly durable. Putin and the nationalist right that has embraced him will not easily give up on their dream of an expanding “Russian world.” And Ukraine will not settle for amputation, regardless of the words used to describe the unsavory operation.

What of east-west relations? China knows that Russia doesn’t really count for anything in geopolitics, aside from its brutal unpredictability. The Chinese have an alliance of convenience, and they’re not going to yoke themselves so closely to the Kremlin that they too fall off the mountain if and when the Russians lose their grip. The real question for China, as Foreign Policy In Focus contributor Michael Klare has pointed out, is how it manages with both the United States and India, two frenemies of old.

Despite various left-wing (and far-right-wing) conspiracy theories, the United States does not want a forever war that bleeds Russia dry. The war is a costly distraction from Washington’s twin concerns: the economy at home and China abroad. If China helps negotiate an end to the conflict, that would help reduce tensions with Washington and win points in India as well, where the war is even less popular.

Now that the door is open again to Beijing, perhaps the United States and China can do a better job of coordinating their approach to the war in Ukraine. Because their alliances are clear, these conversations must be discreet (and who knows, maybe Blinken already got the ball rolling on his recent trip to China).

After all, there is nothing like a noisy marital dispute next door to help quarrelsome parents bond over their relatively more constructive partnership. Cooperating quietly on finding a way to end the war in Ukraine—with a just conclusion that Ukrainians, above all, accept—could ultimately reestablish a better working relationship between Beijing and Washington. The world could use a little détente right around now.

[ first published this piece.]

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Twin Peace Missions Have Limited Success In Ukraine and China appeared first on 51�Թ�.

This historical movement repeats a phenomenon that took place over 2,000 years ago across the Himalayas, both east and west. While the story of yoga and going to China, Japan, Tibet, and Southeast is popular history as part of the spread of Buddhism, only specialist scholars  have traced its to Samarkand and Bukhara and further to the.

The migration of yoga to Central Asia continued for a thousand years, and something similar may be repeating today. If contemporary interest in yoga focuses on personal well-being through āsanas, at its deepest level yoga is about the nature of , which is now the frontier of science.

To the lay yoga practitioner the connection between āsanas and consciousness may appear surprising. But if one thinks of it, we are body and mind. While āsanas are good for the body, prepares us to recognize the realm of mind and awareness, and finally to control it.

Consciousness intrigues the physicist and the neuroscientist for the promise of explaining the emergence and the location of or the self., sociologists and politicians would like to know whether the future will bring conscious machines. It is clear that if such machines can be built, they will change technology and society in profound ways.

The question of the self is at the heart of consciousness, and it has been central to Indian civilization from the earliest times. In Hinduism, the self is called the , or Shiva. In Kashmir in north India, which was a great center for science and scholarship associated with Shiva, it was conceived as “” (�ʰ���������� in Sanskrit). Yoga practices are methods to be one with the light within.

If Shiva is light and viewed as the male principle, the body itself through which one strives to see the light is the domain of the goddess, Shakti, and the female principle. yoga is the coming together of Shiva and Shakti, that is light and the knowledge engendered in the mind.

Yoga and the Many Faces of Shiva

A characteristic of the sculptural or artistic representation of Shiva is multiple faces, although in the aniconic form there is no face at all. The idea behind multiple faces is that Shiva as consciousness (��ٳ���) is present in all directions. In general, representation of Shiva with 1, 3, 4 and 5 faces is quite common with the two-faced representation as half Shiva and half Goddess.

The symbolism with the four faces is described in the : the eastern face represents sovereignty, the northern face represents perfection, the western face represents prosperity, and the southern face represents the control of evil.

Yoga went out across the Himalayas as the worship of Shiva, who was co-opted by . In contrast to Hinduism—where ��ٳ���’s transcendence is clearly stated—Buddhism emphasizes the mind and looks at reality through this prism. Since these differences can be explained away as being semantic, Buddhism has had no problem co-opting Vedic gods.

The medieval-era Indonesian equates Buddha with Shiva and Janārdana (Vishnu).  In modern Bali in Indonesia, Buddha is considered the of Shiva, which is quite accurate if we map the two to intelligence and intuition, respectively. Shiva and Vishnu are praised in the popular Nīlakaṇṭha chant that Buddhists sing in their temples to this day.

Our consciousness provides us with the sense of time, and Shiva is viewed as Time (Mahākāla) in Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism. one of the Seven Lucky Gods in Japan, is a form of Shiva. The god enjoys an exalted position as a household deity in Japan.

The influence of yoga has been so pervasive that , one of the most influential figures of modern China, a founder of the May Fourth Movement and president of Peking University, proclaimed in an essay titled Indianization of China that “India conquered and dominated China culturally for twenty centuries without ever having to send a single soldier across her border.”

Zoroastrianism has a binary view of the world as a struggle between good and evil. Over time, it also reconciled its system with that of Hinduism. Shiva Maheshvara was incorporated into the Central Asian Zoroastrian . The god Zūrvan was portrayed as Brahmā, Ahura Mazda (Adbag) was depicted as Indra, and Veshparkar (Vayu in Sogdian) was represented as Shiva.

Svetovid, Svantovit and the Next Wave

Many Slavic people worshiped gods with multiple heads who were shown in tall wooden statues in their temples. In addition to the three-headed god, the Slavs had , or Svantovid, both of which names have Sanskrit etymology: Svetovid as the “knower of the light”, and Svantovid as the “knower of heart”.

Svetovid, their principal divinity, was depicted as a four-headed god whose main temple stood at Cape Arkona off current day northwest Germany. This temple collected tributes from all Baltic people until it was destroyed by Germanic raiders in the eleventh century.

The four faces of are Svarog (north), Perun (west), Lada (south), and Mokosh (east). One can see the Sanskrit cognates of these names in Svarga, Parjanya, Ladah, and Moksha. The derivation from Europe’s own languages for these names is forced and unconvincing.

When we go deeper in the correspondences, we see that they fit in with the four faces of Shiva described in the Mahabharata and also with the geography of Kashmir from where the worship of Shiva is likely to have gone to the Slavic lands.

The of the gods was perceived in Kashmir to be just north of the valley in the Harmukh peak, which literally means the “face of Shiva”, and this is Svarga (heavens). The west of the valley is from where the rains come (scholars accept the identity of Perun with Parjanya, that is Indra who brings rains). The south of the valley is the pleasant land of India (Ladah means pleasant in Sanskrit), and the east is where the sun rises (merging with the sun is understood as moksha).

The contemporary coming together of yoga and science has within it the potential of mitigating the inevitable disruptions in society arising from pervasive job losses due to AI, and from the shrinking of populations. The imprimatur of science is behind yoga now. Yoga provides both psychological and physical health benefits, including relief from chronic pain, arthritis, stress, and even a healthier heart.

The celebration of the International Day of yoga by the UN, and the knowledge of the of yoga practice on health and well-being is facilitating its in traditional societies. Even a society as religious as Saudi Arabia has decided to include yoga in its school and college . In the next wave, one would expect the spread of the more esoteric aspects of yoga.

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post How Yoga Spread and Transformed World Religions appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The Story of a Dam

A large recent African success is Ethiopia’s . Built on the Blue Nile about 40 kilometers east of Sudan, Ethiopia completed the of filling the reservoir for this huge dam in August last year. Two out of its 13 turbines are now operational, generating 750 megawatts of electricity. Ultimately, the dam is expected to produce more than 5,000 megawatts, which will more than double Ethiopia’s current output.

The construction of the dam is a triumph for Ethiopia. Neighbors Egypt and Sudan opposed the construction, fearful that the dam would reduce their share of the Nile waters. Their fears may be misplaced. The purpose of the dam is to generate hydroelectric power. It might change the timing of the flow of waters downstream but is unlikely to divert much water from the Blue Nile.

The Grand Renaissance Dam is a great Ethiopian triumph. The project was estimated to cost $5 billion. Given Egyptian hostility, international donors turned shy. Ethiopians dug into their own pockets to build this dam. In 2011, when dam construction began, Ethiopia’s GDP was a mere . To put matters in perspective, the country decided to spend 15.65% of its GDP to build one single dam.

The entire country pitched in for the dam effort. The common women and men of Ethiopia bought bonds to fund the dam. The government persuaded employees to contribute a portion of their incomes to the project. Critics suggest that there was a fair degree of arm-twisting and this is probably true, but it is fair to say that Ethiopians saw this dam as a national project.

Impressively, the majestic wall of the dam was constructed without external funding. It is certainly true that China has pitched in to help construct the dam. In the US, China’s role has stirred . Chinese companies have undertaken some of the construction work. In 2013, China provided Ethiopia a “loan of $1.2 billion USD in 2013 to build power transmission lines connecting the dam with nearby towns and cities.”

Yet it is important to remember that this impressive dam is fundamentally an Ethiopian achievement. It is a great example of a very African success.

Educating the Poorest

At the other end of the continent, many poor pupils are let down by South Africa’s education system.  Amnesty International, on this “broken and unequal” system, reported that it was “characterized by crumbling infrastructure, overcrowded classrooms, and relatively poor educational outcomes, is perpetuating inequality and, as a result, failing too many of its children, with the poor hardest hit.”

Even in such a system, a rare success has blossomed in an impoverished community. Bulungula College, an independent school in rural Eastern Cape, has become the first school in the district to achieve a . This college was set up by Bulungula Incubator, which was founded in 2006. Then, “only one parent in the local Xhora Mouth community had passed matric.” In this community, “an average of six people from the community matriculate each year, and 95% of school learners from the area do not pass grade 12.”

In 2022, all 36 learners in the class of 2022 passed the matric examinations. Mthandwa Sincuba is the principal of the college. He hit upon the strategy of extra classes. In his words, “From the beginning of the year, we started with extra classes from 6am until 9pm. We also had weekend classes.”

Under Sincuba’s leadership, Bulungula College also takes a progressive approach. It provides students with better services, has a strict policy against corporal punishment, provides support to children from families that struggle to provide adequate nutrition, offers birth control to all girl students and encourages those who become pregnant to stay on in school until and after they give birth.

This extraordinary project was the brainchild of David Martin. He was walking along the coast in 2002 when he came across a beautiful site by a stunning river. Martin fell in love with the area and the people. They were desperately poor but he worked with the community of Nqileni village, establishing Bulungula Lodge at the river mouth.

Once the lodge was open for business, tourists came to stay in one of the most beautiful parts of South Africa. Today, Martin has transferred Bulungula Lodge to the local community, who now run it themselves and improve their living standards. Bulungula College is part of the same project and is a classic example of a small but significant African success story.

Examples in Every Town and Village

Many think that only outside advisers and external funding can transform poor communities. This is untrue. Almost every country in Africa has local successes that emerged from individual and community initiatives.

Three simple examples where Africans have spent their own money to make a material difference to their lives are:

• the bicycle (now, the scooter),
• the sewing machine, and
• the mobile phone.

Each of these goods has increased income, information and security, transforming millions of lives in the process. The success of the bicycle and now the scooter has been well documented. They provide a cheap way of transport in this vast continent. Similarly, the sewing machine is a raging success. It has provided millions of women livelihood.

Mobile phones are now found across the continent. East Africa has been a leader in , thanks to the ubiquity of these phones and African ingenuity. The system is a world leader in mobile banking. It enables customers to transfer cash as well as shop for products and services. They can also withdraw cash by visiting an agent, typically their local corner shop, or transfer it to others from their phones.

Even the much-maligned gun—the curse of mankind—has helped the continent. African leaders adopted this weapon to resist colonization and Ethiopians beat off Italian invaders in the . On March 1, 1896, African soldiers used guns better than their European counterparts, achieving a historic victory that still fills the continent with pride.

For all the ingenuity in Africa, the question as to who coughs up the cash for the investment the continent needs is tricky. Undoubtedly, funding from the World Bank and the African Development Bank is helpful. Private non-African companies, whether Western, Chinese or Indian, have a role too.

Yet the most important role is perhaps that of the African Diaspora. In 2016, the World Bank estimated remittances crossed that year. Of these, over $440 billion went to developing countries and Africa comprised a small but significant percentage. In November 2022, the World Bank published a report on remittances and estimated that remittances to Africa in 2021 surged by 16.4% to reach . In the same year, aid to Africa was . 

Remittances reach beneficiaries directly. They are often sent to family members, Hence, they are better directed, suffer far less leakage and have a much bigger multiplier effect than aid. In other parts of the world internal savings and remittances have had a much bigger impact than aid. Africa’s people are no different from anyone else in the world. Like many other places in the world, including the US and the UK, they are building their own futures despite their politicians. Over time, African solutions to African problems can resolve Africa’s problems. The many successes are a living testament to that possibility.[ edited this article.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post How Real African Solutions Now Overcome African Problems appeared first on 51�Թ�.

South Africa has been placed onto by the US State Department, which means that it is considered to be a source, transit, and destination country for individuals trafficked for the purpose of forced labour or sexual exploitation. 

Although trafficking in South Africa is not a new issue, the extent of the crime has been growing in recent years. 

According to the annual Trafficking in Persons (TIP), the number of people who became victims of human trafficking has more than doubled in the 2021-22 financial year in South Africa. The document revealed that eighty-three people were trafficked, which comes to a shocking comparison with the sixteen  the year before. 

Increasing cases of trafficking in South Africa raise the question of what needs to be done to target the crime more efficiently. 

Something “Irregular” Happened in the Jeffrey Epstein Case

READ MORE

The (NFN), which is an organization that establishes connecting players working in the counter-trafficking field in South Africa, underlines that for anti-trafficking efforts to be effective all relevant actors within and across civil society and government need to work together.����

The main vulnerability factors 

Poverty and unemployment are amongst the main causes of high trafficking cases in South Africa. These issues worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic asmore than people have lost their jobs since March 2020. Now, in a country with a population of more than sixty million, the unemployment rate is at almost. 

Those living in impoverished communities across South Africa are vulnerable to trafficking within the country due to limited access to education and few job openings. The same underlying causes affect those who are being trafficked from abroad and who think that South Africa offers more economic opportunities than their home countries. As the financial desperation of the most vulnerable is growing, traffickers lure them in with promises of employment, housing, or education. 

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Human Trafficking Hotline reported an increase in false job advertisements which have been used by traffickers as one of the main recruitment methods. Out of all trafficking cases, more than involved this tactic, which is an increase from 20% in the year preceding the outbreak of the pandemic. 

EMBED: /region/north_america/world-trafficking-day-human-sex-traffickers-latest-world-news-32390/

The South Africa Impact Report 2021, by A21, shows that a global organization is fighting to abolish human trafficking. It lists “job and family instability, violence and abuse, lower education, substance misuse, poverty, homelessness, unemployment, and isolation” as factors that lead to a higher susceptibility to victimization in regards to trafficking and exploitation. 

The power of collaboration

Human trafficking is a degrading ruthless form of exploitation that traps in modern slavery. Due to the complexity and the hidden nature of the crime, the anti-trafficking response requires a great degree of collaboration. 

This is where the National Freedom Network steps in as it aims to connect all these actors, which are “acting as a link and ensuring that the interaction between the sectors allows for the flow of communication; the sharing of information, resources and best practices,” Marina Reyneke, the organization’s Operations Manager, tells me. And she adds that “strategic collaborations and networking can be highly effective in preventing and combating human trafficking”.

A to Dark Bali, an Indonesian anti-trafficking network, individual organizations acting independently do not have a supporting infrastructure, which is one of the main reasons for them failing. 

Coalitions bring together organizations that share the same goal. By joining efforts, they can learn from each other, get a more detailed overview of the and trends in the sector, and have more leverage when attempting to influence political positions. Consequently, working together allows them to identify major gaps and develop strategies designed to fill them. 

Helping Girls Escape the Sex Industry

READ MORE

Regrettably, in South Africa, the implementation of some anti-trafficking measures that require the cooperation of state departments and relevant stakeholders from civil society has been “weak and somewhat problematic”,according to. 

Not only is it important to create a platform where anti-trafficking organizations can act as a united force, achieving better cooperation with government agencies�� proves to also be an important part of the NFN’s agenda.��

Reyneke explains, “Government structures have been established and we need the capacity to continue working closely with these. Our vision is to see all sectors of a society organized and united in their efforts to prevent and combat Trafficking in Persons (TIP).  Our mission is to effectively fight Trafficking in Persons (TIP) through strategic networking, partnership and collaboration”.

The way forward

The NFN has been successful in creating an enabling environment for the many anti-trafficking organizations across South Africa. But to keep the momentum, the network needs funding, which can be challenging to secure.

help equip relevant actors with skills to assist survivors and prevent conditions that foster trafficking. Any kind of financial support can make a real impact and allows the Network to grow and expand its reach and continue its mission. “Our long-term goals are to include much more strategic prevention work as well as ultimately becoming a survivor-led Network,” Reyneke says. 

Anti-Trafficking Strategies: Putting the Victim First

READ MORE

The NFN has clearly defined goals and knows what needs to be done to create a more comprehensive anti-trafficking strategy and to better protect survivors. With the help of individual and community donors, the NFN can not only get closer to achieving these aims, but can also ensure the network’s organizational sustainability.��

Looking at the rising trafficking cases in South Africa, it is clear that improvements in the response to the problem are needed. For South Africa to be able to win the fight against human trafficking, the underlying economic, political, and cultural factors need to be addressed and more needs to be offered to organizations such as the NFN that provide a linkage between relevant actors, government, and victims.����

[edited this article]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post How to Curb Rising Human Trafficking in South Africa appeared first on 51�Թ�.

To head off any chance of being imprisoned, he has deployed the so-called “Stalingrad defense.” This is a term for a legal strategy of stalling proceedings based on technicalities. Zuma’s lawyers are fighting every attempt to put him before a judge on the basis of arcane technicalities. Finally, this strategy is wearing thin and Zuma’s supporters are now resorting to alternative tactics.

Past Precedent

This is not the first time that Zuma faces time in prison. Last year, the Constitutional Court of South Africa found Zuma guilty of contempt of court and sentenced him to for 15 months. Zuma’s supporters took to the streets in KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng. They blocked roads, assaulted people, and looted and burned supermarkets.

When Zuma’s legal team were in court on April 11,  they reminded the court of what had happened. They the judge that the riots that ensued after his jail sentence last year resulted in the deaths of more than 350 people. Zuma’s lawyers claimed that the riots “were partly motivated or sparked, to whatever extent, by a sense of public outrage at perceived injustice and special treatment of Mr Zuma.” They were making an obvious threat.

It is important to put Zuma’s July 2021 riots in context. The country’s most notorious mass killing remains the of March 1960. This occurred during the era of apartheid. The massacre cost 69 lives as the police fired into a crowd. The Zuma riots cost many more lives than the Sharpeville massacre.

To contain these riots, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa had to 25,000 troops. He admitted that he had no prior from his intelligence services of the scale of the unrest. This is unsurprising. Zuma was an intelligence agent for the African National Congress (ANC) and has strong links with South Africa’s security services. As the South African media: “Former senior security agency and ANC members aligned with Jacob Zuma have allegedly instigated the unrest in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal. Citing sources in the intelligence community…these former agency members used intelligence networks to spark the riots.”

The government made promises to bring those who instigated the Zuma riots to justice.  Duduzile Zuma-Sambundla, Zuma’s daughter, was one of those of stoking the riots. She and none of the major figures allegedly behind the Zuma riots have been held accountable. Of the 3,000 suspects , all of them have been small-fry.  

Constitutional Challenge And Risk of Becoming a Failed State

Like a latter-day Samson, the former president is threatening to bring down the South African constitutional order around him. Those close to Zuma have threatened both the judges and the constitutional order itself. The South African constitution, shaped under Nelson Mandela is today questioned by factions of the ANC who want to make the judiciary and the constitution subservient to the political establishment.

Many ANC leaders, keen to stave off allegations of wrongdoing, have muttered darkly about the constitution for years. KwaZulu-Natal Premier Sihle Zikalala recently the courts, saying “It is time we should debate whether the country does not need parliamentary democracy where laws enacted by Parliament should be above all and not reviewed by another organ…” Ironically, Zikalala is calling for a return to parliamentary supremacy — the hallmark of the apartheid years.

There is a real cost to such maneuvers by ANC politicians. In its December conference,the party a new leadership. If some ANC members have their way, they could even remove Ramaphosa, although this seems unlikely as of now. Nevertheless, the ANC’s branches and its provincial structures are experiencing a bitter battle between the pro- and anti-Zuma factions. These factions are fighting for the support of the ANC’s 1.5 million members in meetings across the country, some of which are turning violent.

While the ANC is locked in internal battles, there are warnings that South Africa might be turning into a failed state. The government has failed to provide many essential public services already. The railways have been vandalized and looted so severely that no trains in the Eastern Cape since January 7. Critical coal and iron ore exports are grinding to a halt because of  that has gone unchecked for years because of South Africa’s systemic .  As per , “more than $2 billion in potential coal, iron ore and chrome exports were lost” in 2021.

The failure of the electricity supply system is so chronic that it is hardly remarked upon. In the Cape, the opposition Democratic Alliance has plans to the state electricity provider — Eskom — and establish its own power supply.

In a September 2020 , Eunomix warned that “bar a meaningful change of trajectory, South Africa will be a failed state by 2030.” The remarks were in March this year by the treasury director general Dondo Mogajane. He took the view that, if South Africa continued on its present path, it could indeed become a ‘failed state’ with “no confidence in the government, anarchy and absolutely no control in society.”

In April, Ramaphosa was forced torespond to Mogajane. The president adamantly declared that South Africa was “not a failed state yet and we will not get there.” Ramaphosa claimed that his government was taking steps to rebuild South Africa’s capacity and fight corruption. This claim remains an admirable but unfulfilled ambition.

Zuma has not been brought to court and his associates are locked in battle with Ramaphosa’s supporters for control of the ANC and the country. Meanwhile, growth rates slide, unemployment rockets and poverty remains endemic. Even as South Africa is on the slide, the world’s attention is elsewhere. This is a tragedy. Africa could lose one of its few genuine democracies and see the collapse of its largest economy.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Jacob Zuma Threatens to Bring South Africa to its Knees If He Is Jailed appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The first is 1.2 trillion rand ($85 billion). It is the estimate of how much money has been lost to corruption. The government’s commission, chaired by Justice Ray Zondo, has been unearthing corruption on an industrial scale.

Who Can Resolve Ethiopia’s Catastrophic Conflict?

READ MORE

Nelson Mandela himself pointed to this scourge back in 2001, when he : “Little did we suspect that our own people, when they got a chance, would be as corrupt as the apartheid regime. That is one of the things that has really hurt us.”

Yet the graft revealed by Zondo has been eyewatering. This is how The Washington Post the key finding: “[G]raft and mismanagement reached new heights during the 2009-2018 presidency of Jacob Zuma. While details remain murky, observers estimate that some 1.2 trillion rand ($85 billion) was plundered from government coffers during Zuma’s tenure.”

This is a sum that no middle-income country can afford to squander. Many hoped that President Cyril Ramaphosa could rectify the situation, but the glacial pace of his reforms has disappointed many who believed in him.

The other figure is 75%. It is the percentage of youths who are . While the ANC, and the well-connected elite that run the government, help themselves to taxpayers’ cash at will, the young languish without jobs.

Little surprise that the ANC’s appeal is fading. The party fewer than half all votes for the first time when the municipal elections were held in November last year.

Racial Classification in South Africa

Bad as this tale is, at least one could assure friends that state-enforced racial classification is a thing of the past. Gone is the notorious apartheid system that divided every man, woman and child into four racial : “African,” “Indian,” “colored,” “white.” One might have assumed that this madness was scrapped when white rule was eliminated in 1994 — or so one might have thought. Yet every South African is still racially classified by law.

Take one case. Anyone wanting to lease a state farm in August 2021 would be that: “Applicants must be Africans, Indians or Coloureds who are South African citizens. ‘Africans’ in this context includes persons from the first nations of South Africa.” No “white” South African — no matter how impoverished — would have the right to apply. Poverty is not a criterion; only race is considered. Even young men and women born years after the end of apartheid are excluded.

A complex system known as “broad-based black economic empowerment” (BBBEE) was introduced. Every South African is racially categorized and a system of incentives is applied across government and the private sector. White men face the greatest discrimination, African women the least.

Here is an example of how it in one sector. The Amended Marketing, Advertising and Communications Sector Code of 1 April 2016 specifies a black ownership “target of 45% (30% is reserved for black women ownership) which should be achieved as of 31 March 2018. The 45% black ownership target is higher than the 25% target of the Generic Code.” To win tenders or contracts, all enterprises must comply with the regulations.

Race Hate

At the same time, South Africa’s ethnic minorities face racial abuse and racial threats unchecked by the state. The radical populist Julius Malema made singing “Kill the Boers” a trademark of his rallies. In this context, the term “Boer,” or farmer, is about as toxic as the n-word is in the American South.

Malema is now on trial. Yet far from the state prosecuting him for stirring up race hate (a crime in South Africa), it was to an Afrikaans trade union to take him to court. Asked whether he would call for whites to be killed, all Malema say was that, “we are not calling for the slaughtering of white people … at least for now.”

The trial has had to be postponed because the prosecutor was so fearful of being ladled a “racist” for bringing the case that she .

Nor are whites Malema’s only target. Malema has South African “Indians” as an ethnic group, accusing them of failing to treat their African employees fairly. “Indians are worse than Afrikaners,” he in 2017. In another context, he to Indians as “coolies” — possibly the most derogatory term he might have used.  Yet the state fails to prosecute him.

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

I agree to receive emails and other content from 51�Թ�. I understand that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further information .

One final example. When President Ramaphosa was asked to pick the country’s next chief justice, the public some 500 names. The final four were Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, President of the Supreme Court of Appeal Mandisa Maya, Gauteng Judge President Dunstan Mlambo, and Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo. All are fine legal minds. Not one of them is from among the country’s ethnic minorities.

This, despite the fact that some of the most eminent lawyers South Africa ever produced, who fought racial discrimination for years were not African. Men like George Bizos, Joel Joffe, Sydney Kentridge, Ismail Ayob, Edwin Cameron and Bram Fischer would probably not be selected today. Even Arthur Chaskalson, who defended the ANC at the Rivonia trial of 1963 and was chief justice of South Africa from 2001 to 2005, would probably be excluded.

Fighting Back

Glen Snyman — himself a “colored” or a mixed-race South African — has founded People Against Racial Classification to campaign against discrimination. “The government and private sector should deliver to all South Africans equally and not discriminate on identity,” he .

But racial classification has its supporters. Kganki Matabane, who heads the Black Business Council, that even though “democratic rule is nearly 27 years old, it is still too soon to ditch the old categories,” the BBC reports. “We need to ask: Have we managed to correct those imbalances? If we have not, which is the case — if you look at the top 100 Johannesburg Stock Exchange-listed companies, 75% or more of the CEOs are white males — then we have to continue with them.”

The ANC’s most celebrated document was the Freedom Charter of 1955. It was the statement of core principles of the ANC and its allies and memorably promised that: “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white.” With South Africa’s ethnic minorities continuing to face racial discrimination and exclusion from top jobs in government and even in the private sector, it is a promise more honored in the breach than the observance.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post South Africa’s Enforced Race Classification Mirrors Apartheid appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Will American Democracy Perish Like Rome’s?

READ MORE

The most famous was instituted by South Africa’s 1995 Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act. The goal of the new TRC was to uncover the truth about human rights violations during decades of apartheid. The emphasis was on finding the truth from both victims and perpetrators, not on prosecuting individuals for past crimes. In this regard, it differed from the Nuremberg trials that prosecuted Nazis for their crimes.

Societal Schism

The events of January 6 have exposed societal schism to the world. Now, the US needs actions, not words, to form a fully representative, multi-party equivalent of the South African TRC to deal with enduring injustices across the nation. The current American social problem is complex, multi-generational and multi-dimensional. As such, it is not likely to be easily or speedily ameliorated. However, admitting the problem in the style of alcoholics anonymous is a necessary first step to avoiding a looming cultural and economic civil war.

The fundamental problem in America is its broken education system. According to Pew Research Center, a large percentage of Americans still reject the theory of . As per the National Center for Educational Statistics, 21% (43 million) of American adults are functionally — e.g., lacking the basic ability to use reading, writing and calculation skills for their own and the community’s development. The US may be the world superpower, but its poorly educated citizens often lack critical thinking and judgment. Seduced by demagogues, they have drifted into warring camps.

Many thoughtful Americans are worried about divisions in society. The December 2019 issue of was a special report titled “How to Stop a Civil War.” It examined “a nation coming apart.” The magazine brought together the nation’s best writers to confront questions of American unity and fracture. That issue has proved to be prescient.

Since the 2020 elections, the rhetoric in the US became increasingly toxic. Disinformation was rife, calls for insurrection came right from the top and the pot of anger boiled over on January 6. It may not be , but disunity reigns in the United States. A TRC that digs out the truth might be exactly what America needs in a post-truth world.

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions

There have been three significant TRCs since 1990 in South Africa, Chile and Canada. The results of these appear to be mixed. In balance, they seem to have had a positive impact on the arc of the history of their respective societies.

The story of South Africa’s TRC is too well known to be told in full here. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984, investigated crimes during apartheid to record the truth. The TRC offered amnesty to perpetrators of many crimes and rehabilitation as well as reparations to the victims. It might be fair to say that the work of the TRC allowed South Africa to make a peaceful transition from a horrendously unjust apartheid regime to a plural, democratic society.

Chile’s TRC the South African one. It operated from May 1990 to February 1991. The mandate of the Rettig Commission, as Chile’s TRC has come to be known, was to document human rights abuses that resulted in death or disappearance during the years of military rule from September 11, 1973, to March 11, 1990. Notably, investigating torture and abuses that did not result in death did not form part of the mandate of the Rettig Commission. Nevertheless, there is a strong argument to be made why Chile’s TRC was the first step that led to last year’s in which Chileans voted to rewrite the military-era constitution.

Canada’s TRC the Chilean and South African ones. Between 2007 and 2015, it provided those directly or indirectly affected by the legacy of the Indian residential school system with an opportunity to share their stories and experiences. The TRC spent six years traveling to all parts of Canada and recorded experiences of 6,500 witnesses. It recorded the history and legacy of the numerous injustices perpetrated by the residential school system to the indigenous peoples. Its six-volume report with 94 “calls to action” has been accepted by the Canadian government and marks a watershed in the country’s history.

An American Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Unlike South Africa, Chile and Canada, America’s injustices and even its divisions are messier. There is no equivalent of an apartheid or military regime to investigate. Investigating only the injustices against the indigenous Native Americans or formerly enslaved African Americans would be too narrow a remit to renew the American social fabric.

America’s schisms include, but are not limited to, those in education, culture, geography, politics, religious beliefs, skin color and immigration. Just as Catholics and different Protestant sects interpret the Bible in various ways, Americans have radically different interpretations of the Constitution and its amendments. Like many reports, articles and documentaries have now recorded, social media has exacerbated the fractures in American society. Truth itself is in question and distrust in institutions is dangerously high.

The purpose of establishing an American TRC is to slow down, and potentially reverse, the steady rupturing of a fundamentally decent society espousing equal opportunity for all. To avoid the growing risk of a dystopian cultural war, the US needs to identify the problems it faces. If social media is exacerbating divisions, how exactly is it doing so? Is polarization in America based on resentment of the white working class against metropolitan elites, or is it the rural versus urban divide? If so many Americans are functionally illiterate, what exactly is going wrong in the education system? If is now below that in my home country of the UK, why is that so?

For a truth and reconciliation commission to be credible, it must not only identify problems but also provide solutions. Like its Canadian counterpart, it could come up with “calls to action.” Members of an American TRC must come from all walks of life, different political, cultural and religious philosophies, and have a reputation for integrity. In a partisan democracy with tribal political loyalties, they must not belong to any political party. Their core task must be to diagnose what ails America and what can heal it. Only then can this nation, which I have made my home, can be restored to its much-hallowed promise.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Seeking Truth and Reconciliation in America appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Power abhors a vacuum. In many parts of Africa, independence from European imperial powers was just a ceremonial transfer of power to local autocrats. When the imperialists hurriedly packed their belongings and marched off, “” took over and dispensed with niceties such as elections.

As the authors explained in��the previous edition of , Africans chose neither the states they live in nor their borders. Disparate peoples were forced to coexist in rigidly defined sovereign states with centralized power structures that encouraged despotism, patronage and struggle for power. The African Big Man emerged as a��de facto��all-powerful king in a land that had thitherto known smaller homogenous kingdoms or chiefs and council of elders. In a twist of irony, many pre-colonial traditional African regions espoused inclusive democratic values that were further eroded by the emergence of the Big Men.

This month, many elections took place in Africa. All of them were rambunctious affairs. Some had messy outcomes but they point to a new future for a continent where the true will of the people—the women and men at the grassroots—is finally beginning to matter.

South Africa: The Beginning of the End of an Era

The country of Nelson Mandela made history this month. The ruling�� (ANC), once Mandela’s party, lost to the opposition Democratic Alliance (DA)��in local polls in the administrative capital, Pretoria. The DA also won the Nelson Mandela Bay municipality, which has a rich history of anti-apartheid struggle. The��, marking what the BBC called “a tectonic shift in South African politics.”

Although the ANC still won 54% of the national vote, its electoral performance was the worst since the end of apartheid in 1994. Mandela is probably smiling in his grave as democracy takes root in his country. A democrat at heart, he would be glad to see South Africans shed off racial and tribal dispositions, and vote on the issues. Such was the magnanimity of the man that he would sooner see this ideal triumph at the expense of his beloved ANC.

With housing inadequate,��, education poor, water scarce, electricity irregular and garbage strewn in the streets, people lost patience with the corruption scandals and routine incompetence of the Jacob Zuma-led ANC.

South Africa has suffered deeply from the global economic downturn. As demand for commodities has plummeted, earnings and jobs have been in short supply. The ANC is certainly not responsible for the downturn but it has demonstrated a lack of leadership at a time of crisis. In the����and��editions of Africa This Month, the authors chronicled some of the scandals of President Jacob Zuma that have cast a gloomy cloud over the country.

The “Guptagate” scandal hurt the South African economy at the very time it needed a steady hand on the tiller. Zuma arbitrarily sacked Nhlanhla Nene, his capable finance minister, and appointed an upstart instead who barely lasted two weeks into the job. Rumors swirled in South Africa about the wealthy Gupta family wielding undue influence over Zuma, and the deputy finance minister alleged that the family had offered him Nene’s position. This incident shook investor confidence in the economy and the ANC’s reputation was dragged into the mud along with Zuma’s.

Scandals have continued to plague Zuma and the ANC even as the economy and people suffer. In the land of apartheid, many black South Africans have voted for the once white-dominated DA. In 2014, when the DA elected a black leader, Mmusi Maimane,��. Given South Africa’s history, this was a powerful and emotive label. Yet despite the historic appeal of the ANC, black South Africans voted for the DA in the hope it will do a better job in providing services to the people than the ANC.

Clearly, there has been what the BBC calls a “paradigm shift in South Africa’s politics — voters are now more interested in issues rather than race.”

A Fishy Election in Gabon

Despite the ANC being shell-shocked at the outcome of the polls—a pyrrhic victory—South Africa’s elections went off rather smoothly. In West Africa,����was not as smooth; a contest made even more problematic by the fact that it ended up becoming quite a close-run thing. Election authorities declared that President Ali Bongo had garnered 49.8% of the vote, while opposition leader Jean Ping had received 48.2%. Bongo beat Ping by a mere 5,594 votes; the closest presidential election in Gabon’s history.

Bongo came to power in 2009 after��. In the aftermath of that election, the opposition alleged fraud. Their supporters took to the streets and torched the French consulate general. Bongo’s troops crushed the protests with an iron fist, paving way for him to “ascend to the throne” upon the death of his father,��, who was Africa’s longest-serving leader when he died in 2009. He was often described as the last of Africa’s Big Men and the world’s longest serving non-monarch.

Omar Bongo rose to power through the colonial military. He was the first black man to serve in the French Air Force in Chad and French paratroopers once saved his bacon. As a member of the��, Bongo ruled cannily and outlasted most of his fellow leaders. Corruption and violence were par for the course, though, and the Bongo family amassed a personal fortune from the country’s oil boom.

Ping was once an ally of Omar Bongo and has two children with his daughter. He is the son of a Chinese merchant who emigrated from Wenzhou and holds��a from the University of Paris I (Panthéon-Sorbonne). From 2008 to 2012, Ping served as the�� (AUC)��and is a rather well-known international figure.

Ping poignantly points out that voter turnout in Ali Bongo’s home province of Haut-Ogooue was 99.9% and Bongo got 95.5% of votes, while voter turnout in other provinces was between 45% and 71%. A 99.9% turnout is nearly impossible, and not even Australia manages it despite making voting compulsory. Clearly, the vote has not been free and fair. In any case, Gabon’s electoral registers are outdated, and people who leave or die still end up remaining on the rolls. Therefore, Ping’s allegation that the����holds a bit more weight than the gripes about sour grapes of a sore loser.

Subscribe to 51�Թ� for and we will gift you our and invite you to inspiring events.

Unsurprisingly, people are protesting and violence has erupted. Eight hundred people have already been arrested in Gabon’s capital, Libreville. At least another 400 have been locked up in other parts of the country. True to form, the United Nations (UN), the United States and France, the former colonial power and patron of Omar Bongo, have called for restraint and greater transparency about the election results. They have urged for the release of vote tallies in each polling station.

Ping will take the matter to the constitutional court, which will decide upon the election result. Even if the court rules in favor of Ali Bongo, the fact that Jean Ping can go to court is a giant step forward for democracy in a country where Omar Bongo’s opponents were routinely murdered in the 1970s and opposition leader Joseph Redjambe mysteriously died in 1990. Ultimately, the court’s determination could have a profound effect on the direction of Gabon’s democratic evolution.

Zambia Goes to the Polls

Like Gabon, Zambia too had a close election. It was a repeat of last year’s presidential by-election, which was triggered by the death of��, its then-president. In the 2015 by-election,����of the vote. Hakainde Hichilema, his opponent, got 46.7% of the vote and denounced the election as a sham.

This time, Lungu won 50.4% of the vote with Hichilema getting 47.7%. Last year’s election led to a constitutional amendment in January that created a new electoral system in which a candidate needs over 50% of the votes cast to avoid a second round of voting. Hichilema is alleging fraud again and claiming the election result does not represent the will of the people. He is challenging the result in the country’s constitutional court.

Apart from voting for a president, Zambians voted for members of parliament, mayors, local councilors and an amendment to the constitution on changes to the bill of rights. The BBC reported high voter turnout and “.” Election monitors did not report any complaints and��international observers declared . The African Union Election Observation Mission,, declared the election to have been, for the most part, peaceful.

Truth be told, Zambian elections were largely fair but far from perfect. As per the European Union (EU) delegation, they were “” that “unduly affected small parties and independent candidates.” Yet Zambian democracy is alive and kicking. Hichilema’s running mate served the late Sata whose son also supported the opposition leader.

Lungu leads Sata’s party but is not quite formidably in charge. Zambians are restive and the opposition is vibrant at a time when the bottom has been knocked out of the economy. Crashing copper prices have caused mines to close and left thousands unemployed. The country has had to go to the�� (IMF)��cap in hand. At the same time, like the rest of southern Africa,����that the UN has described as the worst in 35 years. Since the region relies on hydroelectric power, electricity has been in short supply as well. The knock-on effect on the economy has been catastrophic.

To its credit, Zambia has not descended into violence or civil conflict despite its economic crisis. Both parties are patiently waiting for a final decision on the election results by its constitutional court. By peacefully holding elections, Zambia has demonstrated that democracy is developing deep roots in this young nation.

Nigeria Slips Into Recession

Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, has��. The latest growth figures show that the economy contracted by 2.1% between April and June. This makes for two consecutive quarters of contraction, which qualifies as recession.

The Nigerian Bureau of Statistics blames low oil prices. Given that the government earns 70% of its revenues from crude oil, deficits have naturally ballooned. The naira, the country’s currency, was finally allowed to float freely in June and lost 40% of its value in a single day. Propping it up was a blunder of Himalayan proportions. Its foreign exchange reserves leaked faster than air out of a deflating balloon. Now, the falling naira has led to other problems. Inflation is at an 11-year high, reaching 17.1% in July.

The country has lost its reputation for fiscal and monetary competence. Markets have lost confidence. Earlier this year, the IMF forecast that the��. That figure might turn out to be higher. Aero Contractors, Nigeria’s second largest airline, has suspended flights and operations indefinitely. Not only oil companies and airlines but also financial institutions and construction companies are firing staff. The entire industrial sector is shrinking. Food, beverage, tobacco, hotels and even tourism sectors are suffering.����as the unemployment rate hits 46%.

This is far cry from the boom years that saw Nigeria become the largest economy in Africa. After its��, Nigeria embarked on a period of high growth on the backs of rising oil prices. Sadly, Nigeria remained a one-trick pony and the country has suffered as the economic tide turned dramatically.

In the��June edition of , the authors pointed out how President Muhammadu Buhari’s “” in the Niger Delta was too expensive for the country. At a time of recession, it might turn out to be utterly unaffordable. In the north, Boko Haram continues to be a problem and economic woes might amplify that unrest.

The silver line for the Nigerian economy is the ��that links Nigeria’s federal capital, Abuja, with its commercial capital, Kaduna. The Chinese constructed the Abuja-Kaduna railway for a cost of about $900 million. Both cargo and passenger trains will run between the two cities, increasing the movement of people, goods and services. This is exactly the kind of investment in infrastructure that Nigeria and the rest of Africa need to get the��economy back on track.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Africa This Month: Democracy Deepens Amidst Economic Woes appeared first on 51�Թ�.

As Africa sits astride the equator, the seasons offer the end of April as a time to reflect. In many parts of Africa, and a new planting season is about to begin. Political, social and economic developments this month provide excellent material for much reflection and are of much significance for the future.

Zuma’s Woes Continue

In March, . This month, he has been hit by a new political storm. On March 31, the Constitutional Court of South Africa ruled that Zuma breached the constitution by ignoring a state order to repay some of the $16 million plus government funds used to spruce up his private residence. Apparently, a pool and an amphitheater were part of security features to protect the president.

Public Protector Thuli Madonsela did not quite agree and rapped Zuma on his knuckles. Mandonsela’s is a credit to her and to South Africa’s young democracy. She courageously asked Zuma to cough up costs “that do not relate to security, and which include Visitors’ Centre, the amphitheater, the cattle kraal and chicken run, the swimming pool.”

Zuma ignored Mandonsela’s order and all 11 of South Africa’s highest justices have held that he showed a “substantial disregard” for the constitutional power of the public protector. The court has held Mandonsela’s order to be legally binding and chided Zuma for not taking remedial action as directed. : “In failing to comply with the remedial action, the president thus failed to uphold, comply and respect the constitution.”

sets another major precedent. It squashed the parliament’s resolution absolving Zuma and nullifying the findings of the public prosecutor. The court held that parliament had not only failed in its duty to hold the president to account, but also that its resolution was unconstitutional. Lawyers who love Latin would term this section of the judgment the locus classicus or the authoritative passage on the doctrines of separation of powers and rule of law.

The highest court in South Africa has made history. Rarely do courts in Africa or indeed anywhere in erstwhile colonies pass such bold judgments. There is a higher chance of getting struck by lightning six times while riding on a unicorn than of seeing an African head of state held to account by the judiciary of his country. As the justices declared, “constitutionalism‚ accountability and the rule of law constitute the sharp and mighty sword that stands ready to chop the ugly head of impunity off its stiffened neck.”

The ruling fired up South Africa’s opposition. Like sharks, they smelt blood. They had long seen Zuma perform Houdini acts, escaping the jaws of justice one scandal after another. Therefore, they launched impeachment proceedings against Zuma. Again, the . Zuma’s charm still works and the African National Congress (ANC) still supports him blindly. Yet he has been greatly damaged and it is unlikely he will wield the same power going forward.

Julius Malema, the firebrand boss of the Economic Freedom Fighters Party, has declared that his party is running out of patience and Zuma’s government has promptly charged Malema with treason. This angry nation with anxieties of the past is on a knife’s edge, and it appears that things will get worse in South Africa before they get better.

Kenya and the International Criminal Court

Kenya’s stormy marriage with the International Criminal Court (ICC) seems to be over. In a landmark majority ruling, the . The court ruled there was insufficient evidence but refused to acquit them. If new evidence comes up, the accused may face trial again. This is unlikely and, therefore, Ruto’s supporters celebrated wildly.

On March 13, 2015, . While giving the notice to withdraw charges, the prosecutor’s office accused Kenyatta’s government of refusing to hand over vital evidence. It claimed that witnesses had been “.” Kenyatta rallied nationalist support by claiming that the ICC was interfering in Kenya’s internal affairs.

The collapse of all cases against the accused after the disputed Kenyan elections of 2007 ends international efforts to pursue justice for victims of violence. Around 1,200 people were killed and more than half a million fled for their lives when a naked pursuit of power led rivals to ignite inter-ethnic clashes that spiraled out of control. Kenyatta and Ruto who are now united in government and against the ICC were rivals then.

Now, victims of violence and their families have no recourse to justice. They will never know the definitive truth or get any compensation. The collapse of cases has revealed the ICC to be weak and ineffective. Its credibility is in question. Louis Moreno Ocampo, the former prosecutor of the ICC, huffed, puffed and thumped his chest but was found wanting when Kenyan politicians called his bluff. His cross-examination of Kenyatta on September 29, 2011, revealed that he was clueless about the sociopolitical dynamics of Kenya. The ICC’s investigations were shoddy and it has proved itself to be an outfit of amateurs. It is in dire need of reform to salvage the little credibility it has left.

To add insult to injury, Kenyatta has already declared that no Kenyan would ever be hauled up in front of the ICC. He claimed that the court unfairly targets Africa and, apart from Georgia, the other eight nations facing trial are African states. . He declared: “Elsewhere in the world, many things happen, many flagrant violations of human rights, but nobody cares.” Unsurprisingly, the African Union is backing the Kenyan proposal to revoke and leave the ICC.

Most countries that have ratified the statute hail from Africa. As the US State Department website clearly says, “.” . The ICC increasingly reminds us of the ill-fated League of Nations that collapsed after World War I because most powers cared two hoots for it. If African states leave then the ICC might lose its raison d’être and implode.

Yet the ICC seems to serve a purpose for many. The idea of international criminal justice might hark back to colonial times, but it also has a draw for victims of violence in conflict-ridden or war-ravaged areas. , “Leaving the ICC with no credible mechanism for justice for mass crimes in sight would be an error of colossal proportions.”

Peace in South Sudan?

This month, the world’s youngest country, gained much needed good news. After two years of civil war, a peace agreement has been concluded. Riek Machar, the rebel leader, has returned to the capital, Juba. in President Salva Kiir’s new unity government.

There is much irony in South Sudan’s peace deal. Machar has taken up the very same position he held before the civil war, which broke out when Kiir fired him. In the ensuing conflict, tens of thousands have been killed and about 2 million people have lost their homes. The economy has hit rock bottom. Kiir and Machar are now referring to each other as brothers. Unsurprisingly, their relations continue to be frosty.

In the midst of relief at some sort of peace dawning over the land, inconvenient questions keep nagging away. Was this bloodshed and wanton destruction necessary? Who is responsible for the tragedies that the people have suffered since the sacking of Machar in July 2013? Will this peace last or is it just a truce before conflict breaks out again?

Despite these questions, people of South Sudan can breathe a sigh of relief for now as the fighting, killing, raping and looting comes to a long awaited end.

Economic Woes

As the Atlantic Council points out, African economies are being hit by a “” of declining commodity prices and downturns in emerging economies. In particular, the economies of Angola, Nigeria and Zambia are suffering because of plummeting oil, copper, iron ore and platinum prices. have declined by 16%. . Other African countries are at risk too.

Even Ghana’s economy is under stress. In 2015, . Falling oil and gold prices are hobbling this African star. Last year, cocoa production dropped to its lowest in five years and continues to slump more this year. Government revenues are limited and inflation is rising.

Anthony Akoto Osei, a ranking member of the parliament’s finance committee, has declared that but, unlike the Hellenic nation, it is unlikely to get a bailout. The Ghanaian government has resorted to heavy domestic borrowing, which is . Only Malawi has higher rates. The bank lending rate of 26% and microfinancing rates as high as 70% are killing local businesses and the general population. The International Monetary Fund is offering Ghana $1 billion of loans on the condition that it will reduce its budget deficit from 7.3% to 5.3%.

Even the Chinese who have long been investing heavily in Africa are not riding to the rescue. and its economic model has run its course. The Middle Kingdom has scaled back its investment in Africa. It is also importing less than before. The fall in both price and quantity of exports is hurting African economies. Consequently, they are facing budget shortfalls, weakening currencies and falling economic growth. Clearly, much pain is in store ahead.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Africa This Month: Taking Stock of Strides in Justice, Peace and Prosperity appeared first on 51�Թ�.

In times of crisis, two heads are usually better than one. It seems that leaders of the two largest African economies, Nigeria and South Africa, have taken this creed to heart. Hence, they are taking steps to bury the hatchet after a period of frosty relations. Both countries are in disarray because oil prices have crashed and commodity prices are falling. As the global economy stumbles, Africa’s biggest economies are taking a beating.

Thus, it makes sense for both countries to get together to cook up responses to the economic crisis engulfing them. It helps that both countries are far away and do not share any borders. They might have frigid relations but are not quite at war. Yet there is another reason why they are patching up. South African President Jacob Zuma is facing intense political heat at home. His state visit to Nigeria, which was inspired by the two countries’ efforts to find common ground, also served as an apostrophe to his domestic tribulations. He desperately needs some good news.

Zuma’s Guptagate

Zuma is facing allegations of corruption yet again. “Guptagate” is his latest scandal. As per allegations, the wealthy and influential Gupta family wields undue influence over Zuma and his government. Toward the end of 2015, , who was a rather well-respected finance minister.

Now, outrage has turned to shock. Mcebisi Jonas, South Africa’s deputy finance minister, has recently alleged that members of . Zuma’s son is under a cloud. The police are investigating him and the Guptas for . The secretary general of the African National Congress (ANC), Zuma’s own party, has declared that South Africa risks becoming a “mafia state” unless it can deal with corruption.

Corruption in poor countries revolves around a simple point. There is a divergence between the law of the land that proclaims public interest and political actions that further private endowment. In the case of South Africa, the absolute domination of the ANC has allowed .

Furthermore, Guptagate reveals that South Africa might be suffering from the crony capitalism that has plagued countries like Russia and Indonesia. Politicians hand over public resources to big business that, in turn, fills their private coffers and funds their election campaigns. The heavy hand of the state remains along with the inequalities of flawed markets, creating a deeply inequitable society.

Election Season

In February, . They continue to remain important. President Mahamadou Issoufou is running for his second term just like many presidents around the world. The only twist is that Hama Amadou, his opponent, has been locked up in jail. It turns out that Amadou is now not in his prison cell, but has been flown to Paris for medical treatment. The opposition have decided that enough is enough. They allege gross electoral violations and are .

Multi-party elections are a new-fangled thing in Niger. They have been around only since 1990 and continue to be flawed. Issoufou is a mining engineer who is referred to as “the Lion,” while Amadou is a comeback veteran who is hence nicknamed “the Phoenix.” This uranium-rich land continues to be trapped in poverty with armed groups operating in the northern desert areas bordering Libya and Algeria, while Boko Haram wreaks havoc in the south along its border with Nigeria. Political turmoil will not help Niger mitigate poverty or control conflict. Unsurprisingly, religious groups, tribal leaders and trade unions are appealing for calm.

Jacob Zuma © Shutterstock

Niger could emulate Benin, its much smaller southwestern neighbor. The presidential elections have gone rather smoothly. For a start, Thomas Boni Yayi, the incumbent president, decided to respect the constitution and retire. By contrast, this month, incumbents were re-elected in Congo-Brazzaville, Cape Verde and Tanzania’s Zanzibar islands. In a continent of strongmen who try to sit on the throne until their last breath, Boni Yayi has earned much respect for his abdication.

Benin’s election attracted more than two dozen candidates. Eventually, two were left standing. Lionel Zinsou, the sitting prime minister, took on Patrice Talon, a local entrepreneur, and lost. who studied at Ecole Normale Supérieure and the London School of Economics. He has been an investor, a merchant banker and a speechwriter for Laurent Fabius when he was prime minister of France. Zinsou has dual nationality and holds a French passport.

Talon is more of a rough and tumble operator. He is a who is known as “the king of cotton.” This was accused of plotting to poison Boni Yayi and fled to exile before the outgoing president pardoned him in 2014. He painted Zinsou as a during the campaign. His dual citizenship was also used against him as a question mark on where his loyalties lay. The tactic worked. Zinsou found it hard to shake off the tag of France’s candidate and lost. He has graciously conceded defeat.

Talon has promised to generate jobs. People believe him because he has a track record of creating wealth. The entrepreneur has also promised to decentralize powers currently concentrated in the hands of the president. Talon has also promised to introduce a five-year term limit, a radical new development. Whether he delivers or not, Talon’s victory reveals that his country wants the colonial centralized model to change. Citizens are yearning for a more bottom-up system with greater public participation and accountability.

Many Forms of Violence

Terrorism is a global phenomenon that afflicts cities from Baghdad to Brussels. Countries from Pakistan to France are facing wanton attacks of violence. African countries are no exception. Ivory Coast experienced an attack by al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). and killed 14 people. Soldiers rushed to the scene and killed all the gunmen. Two soldiers lost their lives in the daring rescue.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) delivered a landmark ruling on March 21. It convicted Jean-Pierre Bemba, a former rebel-turned-opposition leader in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), who has been found guilty of crimes, including rape and murder…

The attack is part of a pattern wherein terrorists are targeting soft civilian targets to create a climate of fear. Ivory Coast is cooperating with France to stymie the rise of AQIM and is home to the main French base in the region. The country has taken strong measures against AQIM in the Muslim north of the country. It banned foreign Muslim preachers from entering the country and suspended the construction of mosques because they were deemed to be breeding grounds for terrorism. Inevitably, Ivory Coast is a target and expected fanatical Islamic terrorists to attack sooner rather than later. Just like Europe or Asia, Africa faces a terrorism problem. States, religious organizations, tribal leaders, civil society and regional organizations have to cooperate closely to tackle it.

This attack was spectacular but not as worrying as the violence in South Sudan. In recent months, . Patients are killed, hospitals are looted and structures are torched in acts of wanton cruelty that constitute war crimes. Medical organizations are pulling out and already poor health conditions are worsening without adequate care. Malnutrition is rife, causing terrible damage to young children. A terrible tragedy is unfolding as South Sudan’s civil war rages with ever greater ferocity. As of now, there seems to be little hope in the immediate future.

Finally, drone strikes against al-Shabab have been the subject of a . In March, the involving both manned and unmanned aircraft. Supporters of airstrikes claim that they weaken al-Shabab. This brutal and ruthless organization has been ambushing Kenyan soldiers and killing innocent civilians at will. Therefore, airstrikes in general and drone strikes in particular have a key role in defeating al-Shabab.

Opponents point out that and the killing raises three big issues. First, the legal justification for summary execution by presidential fiat of whoever occupies the White House is slim at best and nonexistent at worst. Second, it is more than possible that drone strikes kill innocents or, to use the politically correct term, cause collateral casualties. In 2014, . Third, drone strikes might be helping al-Shabab instead of hurting it. The number of its fighters has doubled since 2013 despite successful airstrikes. Abukar Arman, Somalia’s former special envoy to the US, has called the drone strikes a “priceless propaganda tool for al-Shabab.”

The Hague © Shutterstock

ICC Makes History

The International Criminal Court (ICC) delivered a landmark ruling on March 21. It convicted Jean-Pierre Bemba, a former rebel-turned-opposition leader in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), who has been found , which were committed by his troops against civilians in the Central African Republic (CAR).

The ruling is significant for three key reasons. First, Bemba is the most senior political leader to have been convicted by the court. At the time of his arrest in Brussels, Bemba was a senator in Congo and the big boss of the Movement for the Liberation of Congo (MLC). He also served as one of DRC’s vice-presidents in a unity government. In brief, Bemba is big fry and his feet have been held to the fire.

Second, Bemba is the first person to be convicted for committing these atrocities in a foreign country. His militia crossed the border into neighboring CAR to assist then-President Ange-Felix Patasse in crushing the rebels trying to depose him.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, “ and establishes the principle that commanders are responsible for the actions of their subordinates.” In the month that celebrates International Women’s Day, the ICC ruling provides protection for women’s rights that have been violated since time immemorial. It situates women’s rights at the very heart of such customary international law norms to which humanity permits no derogation. It sends a powerful message to military commanders and militiamen that, henceforth, they will be held responsible for acts of sexual violence.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:�� / / /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your ��is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Africa This Month: A Welcome Time For Change appeared first on 51�Թ�.

As per an ancient African proverb, the prettiest flowers bloom amidst the sharpest thorns. Amara Konneh, the finance minister of Liberia, is one such flower. This “land of the free” is not quite as free as it sounds. Members of Liberia’s Senate are used to perks and privileges. Konneh wants to trim them and Liberian senators want to send him to jail for his efforts.

Wabenzi Perks

Prima facie, this sounds like yet another horror story from Africa. However, Konneh’s case demonstrates that a new wind of democratization and accountability is blowing through the continent. Named the “2014 African Finance Minister of the Year,” the fact that Konneh’s steady hands guide the country’s fiscal docket is heartening. That he is trimming the perks and privileges of senators is historic.

In Africa,����have long led a charmed life. They ride in flashy Mercedes Benz cars, drink San Pellegrino sparkling water and wear Rolex gold watches to flaunt their status. Africa has long suffered from the “big man syndrome,” but leaders like Konneh are challenging this culture of ostentation and impunity. Konneh has����for curbing corruption and waste.

This month, Konneh set his eyes on high-flying senators. He is cutting down their personal allowances for vehicles, homes and other goodies to save Liberia $1.2 million. This may not sound like a lot of money, but Liberia’s economy is in shambles. The killed nearly 5,000 people. One of the poorest countries in the world came to the brink of collapse as businesses folded and foreign investors pulled out. Konneh has been trying to stabilize and revitalize the economy at the time of a global slowdown.

Liberia’s senators have responded by ordering Konneh’s arrest. The��Wabenzis��are outraged that the finance minister has the temerity to tamper with them. For the moment, the arrest order is in abeyance because one senator has filed a motion for reconsideration. Konneh might still be arrested, but he has challenged the big men of Liberia. It will be hard for them to put the genie of accountability back into the bottle.

Election Sagas

Yoweri Kaguta Museveni has been president of Uganda since 1986. On February 18, 2016, he was re-elected. Like , Museveni shows no signs of stepping down. Museveni has melded “.” Kadumba Busingye, a lawyer and a poet, calls Museveni “a sophisticated dictator in a suit.” The wily old fox ruggedly navigated his electoral designs through teeming disgruntled opposition street protests and the cacophony of accusations of rigging.��, heralding a chorus of dissatisfaction with the conduct of the electoral process. Since then, armed soldiers have been patrolling the streets of Kampala, the national capital. Their job is to intimidate voters who feel cheated, angry and disenfranchised.

Ugandan elections were far from free. International observers expressed their discontentment with both the overarching democratic climate of the country, and the independence and transparency of the electoral commission. Kizza Besigye, Museveni’s former physician and longstanding opponent, was arrested several times. On one occasion, Besigye was detained for disrupting traffic. More generally, Ugandan authorities argued that Besigye was a threat to peace. The media have been muzzled and there is reason to despair. Yet there is much reason to hope.

© Shutterstock

This land that has seen the likes of Idi Amin is in every facet, leaps and bounds to the good now. Museveni is not executing his opponents summarily. Besigye addressed large rallies in both urban and rural areas. The latter have historically been Museveni’s stronghold, but large numbers turned up to hear Besigye. On February 13, Museveni and Besigye squared off in the first live television debate featuring a sitting Ugandan president. Prior to this, Museveni had dismissed, out of hand, the idea of a debate as an exercise for schoolchildren. He had to eat his words and rock up for this exercise in his pursuit of power.

Public opinion now matters. The media might be on a tight leash, but social media has come into its own. Political discussions occur on social media such as Facebook and Twitter. Mobile banking enables new candidates to raise money to fund their election campaigns. Museveni still rules but his days on the throne might be numbered.

In Niger, President Mahamadou Issoufou is facing a challenge from Hama Amadou. Elections are underway in this uranium-rich landlocked West African country. The first round has been indecisive despite the fact that Amadou is in jail. This is a great boost for democracy. It shows that people are starting to discover the power of the ballot box. It also shows that challenges to the big men of Africa are becoming more robust.

There are three specific reasons to be optimistic. First, Amadou chose to return to Niger to contest elections. This former prime minister and president of the National Assembly could have stayed in exile, but his return is symbolic of the new trend of Africans coming home to make a difference. Second, Amadou is still running for office despite being locked up on what are believed to be trumped up charges of child trafficking. Third, electoral irregularities are diminishing. Unlike Saddam Hussein, Issoufou is����and is certainly not winning 100% of the vote. Regardless of what happens in March, the forthcoming runoff offers reasons to cheer.

International Criminal Court

The (ICC) has been trying to convict some prominent Kenyans for crimes against humanity. The ethnic violence that broke out in 2007, although brief, killed 1,200 people. Over half a million were displaced. Luis Moreno Ocampo, a former ICC prosecutor, thumped his chest and declared that he would slay the dragons of impunity and injustice. Yet all but two of his cases against the indicted Kenyans collapsed dismally before trial. Remaining in the dock are Kenya’s deputy president, William Ruto, and one other.

An amendment to the ICC’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopted during the 12^th��session of the Assembly of State Parties, on November 27, 2013, allow the court to use previously recorded and subsequently recanted witness testimony in certain circumstances.

In South Africa, President Jacob Zuma is on the ropes. The fall of global commodity prices has battered Africa’s second-largest economy.

The prosecutor’s case in the two remaining Kenyan cases sought to rely heavily on recanted witness testimony. This month, in what may be the final blow that collapses the last of the prosecutor’s Kenyan cases, the ICC’s Appeals Chamber unanimously rejected the admissibility of recanted evidence. The ICC ruled that its 2013 decision could not be applied retroactively in the Kenyan cases to the detriment of the accused persons.

Some argue that this has given Kenyan politicians the��. It certainly demonstrates the incompetence of the ICC. It conducted shoddy investigations, did not take the time to research the veracity of witness testimony, relied on contradictory evidence by different witnesses, demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of Kenyan sociopolitical conditions, and naively failed to protect witnesses. Some of them have disappeared mysteriously, while others have retreated into the shadows after complaining of intimidation.

Many argue that the ICC targets Africa disproportionately or even exclusively. All cases before it, without exception, involve African countries. Despite appalling atrocities by the in Syria, Iraq and beyond, the ICC is yet to investigate any atrocity or charge anyone in the Middle East. Recent revelations are proof that the ICC conducted its Kenyan investigations with cavalier abandon. It faces a real crisis of credibility going forward.

Economic Challenges and Opportunities

In , President Jacob Zuma is on the ropes. The fall of global commodity prices has battered Africa’s second-largest economy. To add insult to injury, the country’s agricultural sector is facing the worst drought in over a century. Unemployment is at 24.5% and food prices have surged. Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan bluntly declared that the country’s economy was in crisis.

Gordhan cut economic growth forecasts to an anemic 0.9%. He has drawn up a remedial road map to stave off a ratings downgrade to junk bond status. This would increase the cost of borrowing and South Africa would have to pay higher interest rates to issue new debt. Gordhan has presented a new budget with soft tax increases, government spending cuts and a temporary halt on public sector hiring. Despite his efforts, investors remained unconvinced that the economy is back in the saddle. The rand continues to fall.

The African National Congress (ANC), the ruling party, is facing its toughest year since it came to power. Municipal elections are scheduled for later this year. With a wobbling economy, the ANC faces increasing discontent.

Yet it is not all doom and gloom in Africa. Sub-Saharan Africa is urbanizing faster than any other part of the world. By 2030, 50% of its population will live in cities and��. Hence, retail, financial, construction and technology sectors in cities continue to do well. Lagos, Nairobi, Accra, Johannesburg and even Kinshasa are still boomtowns. Despite��, African economies continue to present opportunities and canny investors are sniffing around for them. To end with another salient African proverb: A hand that has been licked must, thitherto, not have been empty.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: ��/ ��/

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Africa This Month: Democracy on Trial appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Africa is the birthplace of humanity and the continent with the oldest history. Yet it is the youngest continent still seeking its tryst with destiny. Africa’s storied narrative is as enduring as the Nile, and yet it has long been ignored by mainstream media.

Therefore, we have decided to right that wrong. We have decided to tell you the story of Africa with its multitudinous cadences and intricate plots. The great continent is on the march despite all trials and tribulations. It bubbles with the energy of youth and pulsates with hope for the 21^st century. There is a great story waiting to be told and, therefore, we begin our first chapter of Africa This Month.

Global Slowdown

This has been a tough month for the global economy. from Tokyo and Dubai to London and New York. The slowing Chinese economy is casting a dark shadow on Latin America and Africa. Its insatiable hunger for commodities is waning. As a result, Brazil is in deep recession. much better and such as Angola, Ghana and Mozambique are suffering too. The Chinese no longer need as much copper, tin, iron, oil and other raw materials. So, commodity prices have crashed and so have African economies.

In 2015, African exports to China amounted to $67 billion. This was . Chinese investment in Africa also fell by 40% in the first six months of 2015. Nigeria and South Africa, the two largest African economies, are in dire straits. Their currencies have fallen to . This has increased the cost of servicing their debt. Credit rating agencies have lowered or downgraded their outlook. Hence, borrowing has become more expensive. Unsurprisingly, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicts because of lower commodity prices and higher borrowing costs.

Economic downturn is particularly damaging for Nigeria. President Muhammadu Buhari is taking on Boko Haram, a radical Islamist group that has long unleashed violence in the region. This costs money. However, Nigeria earns 80% of its revenues from oil and does not have much cash in the bank these days. Former President Goodluck Jonathan’s national security adviser is under arrest. He is earmarked for buying weapons to fight Boko Haram. The specter of potential unrest in the Niger Delta is raising its head.

Drought is worsening the economic situation in many parts of Africa. Ethiopia’s northern Tigray and Afar regions are suffering their worst drought in 50 years. A less severe drought in 1984 killed more than a million Ethiopians. Many think Ethiopia’s drought to be “.” More than 10 million people need food aid and 400,000 children suffer malnutrition. In southern Africa, because last year’s harvest was damaged by El Nino.

Poor political choices are hurting countries like South Africa. Inflation is rising and so is unemployment. In December 2015, President Jacob Zuma replaced the respected Nhlanhla Nene with a nonentity named David Van Rooyen as finance minister. The markets lost confidence and Zuma appointed a third person to this position in desperation. Pravin Gordhan, South Africa’s finance minister, faces a big challenge to reform an economy of shopping malls, ballooning deficits and rampant corruption.

The Horror of Terror

In Nigeria, Buhari has claimed that the war against Boko Haram is “technically” won. Yet the group continues to strike targets at will. It has launched several attacks in the northern parts of Nigeria and Cameroon. Suicide bombers are targeting crowded areas such as marketplaces. On January 25, in a marketplace in the village of Bodo in northern Cameroon.

Muhammadu Buhari / Flickr

In other parts of West Africa, trouble continues to brew. On January 15, al-Murabitoun, an affiliate terrorist group of al-Qaeda led by the elusive Mokhtar Belmokhtar, , the capital of Burkina Faso. It was a carbon copy of the attack on an upscale hotel in Mali last year, and 32 people from 18 countries were killed.

In East Africa, Kenya’s campaign against al-Shabab in Somalia suffered its most devastating blow��to date. On January 15, al-Shabab militants overran a Kenyan army base in southwestern Somalia. The group claims to have killed about 100 troops, a figure the Kenyan government vehemently denies while keeping its lips tight about the death toll.

After this incident, from two military bases in the region. This vacuum has reportedly been filled by al-Shabab. Yet Kenya has declared it will remain in Somalia, and other African states seem to be set for the long haul too.

In East Africa, the African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) forces, comprising over 22,000 troops and police from Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda, Djibouti, Burundi and Sierra-Leone, lead the fight against al-Shabab. About 8,700 African Union (AU) troops from Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Benin are battling Boko Haram. The US is providing intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. France and Britain are helping too.

Elections and Democracy

There are 19 general elections scheduled for 2016 on the continent. Yet it is Burundi’s controversial poll last year that is most in the news. Its president has proved to be most unlike Nelson Mandela and has amended the constitution to give himself a third term. This has led to rioting and even a failed coup.��Hundreds are dead and human rights abuses are suspected. So alarming are the unfolding events that the AU passed a resolution to send troops to restore peace in Burundi. The government has declared that it would consider AU soldiers as an occupying force.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame has won 98% of referendum votes removing term limits. This means that he could stay in power forever. Kagame seems to be popular in Rwanda because he has presided over a period of high economic growth. Yet it does not bode well that the president is unable to leave office.

The bright spot in Africa is Tanzania. In 2015, it elected a president with the lowest victory margin in its history. Yet John Pombe Magufuli, nicknamed “The Bulldozer” for eminently reasonable reasons, has arguably had the best start to a presidency in the country’s colorful history. In the few months since his election, he has lived up to his campaign slogan, “Hapa kazi tu,” Swahili for “Here, it is all about work.”

After ravaging West Africa for nearly three years, the World Health Organization (WHO) served up some good news for the start of the year. It announced on January 14 that the Ebola epidemic was over—that the disease had been eradicated.

In a break from the past, Magufuli suspended lavish Independence Day celebrations. Instead, he used the day to embark on a public environmental cleaning exercise. Magufuli has curtailed unnecessary foreign travel by government officials. He has taken on corruption. He fired several top ranking state personnel, including the country’s anti-corruption tsar. He personally inspects several government offices to ascertain whether officials were performing their duties and has warned lazy officers that their days of apathy are numbered. So far, Tanzanians and other Africans are cheering him on.

Yet even Magufuli has to be kept under watch. His government has been accused of intolerance toward dissent because it shut down and banned a weekly newspaper on the grounds it was inciting violence. Tanzanians might do well to remember to keep the feet of the powerful close to the fire.

Ebola: Over or Not?

After ravaging West Africa for nearly three years, the World Health Organization (WHO) served up some good news for the start of the year. It announced on January 14 that the Ebola epidemic was over—that the disease had been eradicated. Before celebrations could begin in earnest, the WHO reported the next day that there was a probable new case of infection in Sierra Leone. This serves to demonstrate how robust and long-drawn-out the fight against this deadly disease has been. Even a single case attracts minute attention.

It is safe to expect, following lessons learned over the last three years, that the WHO and the countries affected by Ebola are battle-hardened. They have the expertise to deal with future incidences of the disease. The key question is whether the WHO has the ability to deal with a new epidemic that may break out. The recent outbreak of the Zika virus in South and Central America is a potential case in point.

Although Zika is not new to the continent, it is spreading in Brazil in an alarming way. Zika was first discovered in Uganda. The continent has not faced the explosive contagion that is unfolding in Latin America. In Brazil, experts believe Zika leads to a below-average head size and a smaller than average brain size in children born to mothers suffering from the virus—a condition known as microcephaly. It shows that Africa remains highly vulnerable to a contagion, old or new.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: / /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Africa This Month: Global Economic Slowdown Afflicts Africa appeared first on 51�Թ�.

After days of wrangling to try have him arrested, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir has��left South Africa before a court there could decide whether to arrest him.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has been trying for years to have Bashir apprehended since charging him with the commission of atrocities against civilians in Darfur, which resulted in the deaths of over 300,000 people. He has flouted the ICC’s arrest warrant since it was issued in 2009, blithely traveling throughout Africa and the Middle East, despite a��United Nations Security Council ��that requires all states to cooperate with the ICC.

There were some signs that this time things might be different. As soon as he arrived in Johannesburg, the��South African Litigation Centre��submitted an urgent request for his arrest, and ICC Judge Cano Tarfusser����that there was “no ambiguity or uncertainty” to this obligation—something of which the South African authorities were already well aware.

The Gauteng High Court made an interim order that Bashir could not leave South Africa before it reached its decision on enforcing the ICC arrest warrant, but he left the country—just as he fled��Kenya��in 2011 and��Nigeria��in 2013, when efforts were made to arrest him.

But his escape from South Africa is not just an individual act of defiance. It is a reminder that, for all the legal obligations binding states to cooperate with the ICC, there is no shortage of opposition to the pursuit of Bashir and his ilk.

Impunity Club

The African Union (AU), the main political forum of African states, has been a growing critic of the ICC’s “intervention” in Africa, and it has passed a number of resolutions on head-of-state immunity since Bashir was indicted—many of them to specifically protect him. In 2009, the AU issued a����supporting him, expressing its concern that his indictment could derail the Darfur peace process. This was followed in 2010 with a��declaration��that it would not with the ICC to arrest Bashir.

The AU doubled down on those moves in 2011 at the start of the ICC case against Kenyan President��Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy, Williem Ruto,��in 2011, declaring immunity for sitting heads of state. This was only compounded by the Kenyan government’s that the ICC was being neocolonial and “targeting Africans.”

In 2014, the AU approved the��Malabo Protocol,��which created an International Criminal Law Section in the��African Court��to and prosecute international and other crimes, but it still allowed immunity for heads of state and senior government ministers.

The position of the African Union’s anti-ICC countries is that sitting heads of state should not be brought before the ICC until they have left office. But as demonstrated by recent violence in����and the��re-election of Bashir, many leaders outstay or extend their constitutional term limits and refuse to leave office unless forced (as was Blaise Compaoré in��Burkina Faso).

Another argument these countries make is that sitting heads of state should be����from ICC arrest warrants in order to carry out their duties at annual meetings and sessions. This broad immunity was by the��UK House of Lords��in 1999 after the arrest of Augusto Pinochet. The lords ruled that heads of states, or former ones in this case, could not claim diplomatic immunity for atrocities that went against international law, such as torture and genocide.

African Support

Not all African states support the AU position—Botswana��is a notable hold-out—and many African civil society groups remain strong advocates for the ICC. African states form one the largest blocs of signatories to the ICC’s Rome Statute—34 countries have signed up. Many Africans hold key positions in the court: the chief prosecutor,��Fatou Bensouda, is from the Gambia; there are four African judges; and the president of the��Assembly of State Parties��is from Senegal. The first conference to review the court’s statute was�� in Uganda in 2010.

Given that so many African countries are, in fact, willing participants in the ICC (at least in principle), the AU’s position reflects nothing so much as pure political posturing and cronyism among its leaders.

Although all the cases currently before the ICC do involve African countries, the court is not targeting African leaders; it is trying to deliver justice to African victims where their governments fail to do so. This is based on the core principle of��, under which the ICC only investigates and prosecutes international crimes where governments are unable or unwilling to do so.

During the drafting of the statute of the ICC, African states were some of the most vocal supporters, calling for reparations for victims and the end to impunity for international crimes. Some commentators have�� out��that the ICC has been instrumentalized by states, targeting the losers of the conflict or militia leaders; out of 35 individuals indicted by the ICC, only four were heads of state at the time their arrest warrants were issued.

Flickr

This is the context in which the Bashir farce played out—and his escape shows just how far the ICC has to go before it can fulfill its core mission.

The ICC was created for exactly these kinds of cases; its whole raison d’être is to end impunity and deliver justice to the victims of international crimes, no matter the political power of perpetrators. But in the case of Darfur, only a few rebel leaders have been brought before the court. In December 2014, the ICC’s chief prosecutor����that she was no longer pursuing investigations in the country because other states were not enforcing the court’s arrest warrants.

Had Bashir been surrendered to the ICC, it would be a major coup for the court. Other heads of state, such as Ivory Coast’s��Laurent Gbagbo, were surrendered to the ICC after being forcibly removed from office, whereas Kenya’s president and vice-president voluntarily went to the ICC and remained in office. Bashir’s arrest would have meant that, no matter how long their tenure or lofty their position, the perpetrators of international crimes could not expect to avoid justice.

Instead, with Bashir at large, the Darfur case looks more stagnant than ever. It was to the ICC by the UN Security Council��more than ten years ago, but investigators still do not have access to Darfur itself or to the perpetrators they have spent years pursuing.

The ICC’s reliance on the cooperation of states confirms the famous quip from the respected Italian ��Antonio Cassese that international criminal justice is “a giant without arms and legs.” Yet as�� from Latin America��have proven, former dictators need not be allowed to outrun justice, even with protection from international allies and in old age.

Although the ICC can appear powerless, its primary purpose is to vindicate victims of international crimes with state support, leaving perpetrators with nowhere to run—as long as countries don’t choose to protect them for political reasons. That is the moral question South Africa had to grapple with, and by allowing Bashir to get away, it has taken the wrong side. It may be that South Africa finds itself before the UN International Court of Justice for failing to cooperate with the ICC.

*[This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: / /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your ��is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Al-Bashir’s Escape: Why the African Union Defies the ICC appeared first on 51�Թ�.

News on Africa is usually about violence, corruption and poverty. When positive developments occur, they are often ignored. Such is the case this week as well.

Every major media outlet covered the post- killings march in Paris. Few except Al Jazeera have noted that thousands of marched to demonstrate their support for foreign nationals and oppose xenophobic violence. Many South Africans say that their country is a powder keg waiting to explode. Yet the march reveals a resilience that is oft ignored.

On March 30, violence began in Durban. Since then, eight people have been killed and many thousands displaced. The government has deployed the army to quell the violence. A procession of people that spanned five kilometers, over three miles, may do more good than the deployment of the army.

A major theme of the march was pan-Africanism. This idea was born during imperial times to bring the oppressed Africans together. The collapse of communism and Africa’s inter-tribal rivalries led to this idea falling out of fashion. During the march, placards like “One Africa, One Nation” and “I am African before South” demonstrated the new sentiment of solidarity that people are seeking to foster.

The divisions in South Africa are deep. A society scarred by apartheid and beset by crime is struggling to create jobs for its young. Unemployment is at a staggering 25%. Immigrants are easy scapegoats. For years, South African institutions were instruments of oppression and exploitation. Today, they lack structures and capacity to tackle the scale of challenges in townships. As the global demand for commodities has weakened, growth has slowed down. In any case, growth in South Africa did not lead to much job creation.

Just as the were preceded by an increase in the price of bread, the violence in South Africa was foreshadowed by an economic crisis. The country’s debt rating was downgraded toward the end of last year and is in danger of junk status. A huge public sector wage bill leaves little money for roads, ports and schools. Power cuts are rampant. In March, the government bailed out Eskom, South Africa’s leading power supplier, to the tune of $2 billion. Economic strains led to the ripping apart of the social fabric and consequent xenophobic violence. The march this week is far more remarkable than the one in Paris in light of the challenges that South Africans face, and it is a triumph of their spirit in the face of much adversity.

© Shutterstock

Adversity is affecting other BRICS nations too. ’s economy is floundering and jobs are hard to find. Petrobas, its petrochemical giant, has been involved in a long-running scandal that has seen $2 billion misappropriated. In Russia, people are suffering because the economy has shrunk by 2% as sanctions start biting. The rouble has collapsed, causing Russia’s import bill to skyrocket and its export income to shrivel. Falling oil prices have not helped.

Even the Chinese dragon is breathing less fire. Its economy grew at its slowest pace since early 2009 this quarter and industrial production dipped in March. The People’s Bank of has responded by lowering the bank reserve requirement ratio by one percentage point, the biggest cut since the Great Recession of 2008. This means that banks have to keep less cash as reserves. This in turn implies that banks will have an extra 1.2 trillion yuan ($194 billion) to lend. Chinese authorities hope that more lending by banks will stimulate businesses and create jobs. The great risk is that this action might only increase the already Himalayan levels of bad debts on the banks’ books.

is in the news this week because of the suicide of a farmer at a political rally. Even as parties accuse each other for causing the death, the reality is that far too many farmers commit suicide in this country. In 2004, over 18,000 farmers killed themselves, while more than 13,700 did so in 2012. Debt and distress can be a daily feature of life for those tilling the soil. Any setback such a drought or a crop failure tips them over the edge. In the past few weeks, many farmers have killed themselves because heavy rain has damaged their crops.

It is important to note that farmers are prone to suicide in all parts of the world. In India, their lives are more extreme because irrigation, credit and storage are largely unavailable. For instance, a third of the produce rots because of a lack of storage. This means that farmers have to sell when prices are low and buy when demand is high. The volatility that farmers face is so extreme that they can easily end up in a debt trap from where there is no escape but death.

To be fair, India’s political elite has tried to address this problem in fits and starts. However, even its inadequate efforts have been wrecked by India’s notoriously callous bureaucracy. Banks that are supposed to lend to farmers end up giving money to big landlords. Relief money for farmers suffering from calamities is siphoned off by crooks and officials. The elite’s criminal neglect of irrigation, storage and education is the key reason for farmer suicides and low agricultural growth.

Even as farmers die in India, immigrants seeking to reach drown in the Mediterranean Sea. The turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East is causing thousands to flee to Europe. This year, an estimated 35,000 immigrants made it. Some 1,750 did not. This week, a boat sank killing 800 people on board. Horrified by the incident, Europe tripled its migrant rescue funding. Die Zeit summed up the dilemma facing Europe with characteristic German forthrightness: “We don’t want migrants to drown. We don’t want them over here. So what do we want to do?”

The United States and President face another dilemma. Drones don’t quite work as well as claimed, but they avoid body bags returning home. Many argue that over reliance on technology might be weakening the fine art of intelligence gathering by robbing it of the human element. Some weeks ago, “The World This Week” out that the US targeted 41 people via drone strikes but ended up killing 1,147. Most of those killed were innocent, but the US does not acknowledge that fact.

This week, Obama admitted that two hostages had been killed in a drone strike on al-Qaeda. Both were fair-skinned Caucasians holding US and European passports. Some lives are worth more than others and, therefore, Obama had to apologize. Yet the dilemma will continue. Drone strikes are likely to cause increasing “collateral casualties” but will save American lives.��Obama is a fine intellectual and a churchgoer. He and his fellow citizens might do well to remember the words from the Hebrew Bible: “They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind.”

[seperator style=”style1″]The News Media Triumph Again in Britain[/seperator]

Flickr

After 15 years of public scandals, only 23 journalists and officials have been held criminally accountable for illegally accessing information.

For decades, British journalists have illegally accessed personal information and bribed officials, yet they remain essentially self-regulated without criminal accountability, even for behaviors that are unambiguously illegal.

In 2000, a few journalists started reporting the problem, mostly blaming unauthorized access to private telephone conversations and voicemails. From September 2002, a few newspapers (principally The Guardian) named other newspapers (the News of the World) as illegal gatherers of data.

The system of self-regulation was topped by a Press Complaints Commission, which effectively ignored or frustrated complaints by claiming a lack of evidence or powers. The British government referred complaints to the Press Complaints Commission. The Metropolitan Police (Met), which is responsible for policing London, where most British media outlets are based, was disinterested.

In November 2002, a separate regional police force invited the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which is responsible for regulating…

*[You can receive “The World This Week” directly in your inbox by subscribing to our mailing list. Simply visit����and enter your email address in the space provided. Meanwhile, please find below five of our finest articles for the week.]

[seperator style=”style1″]Does the Yemen Conflict Pose a Threat to the GCC?[/seperator]

© Shutterstock

A domestic rebellion in Yemen has devolved into a sectarian security threat to the entire Arabian Peninsula.

What started out in 2004 as an internal conflict between the Houthis — a Shiite rebel movement — and the Yemeni government seems to have devolved into an ideological and geopolitical war involving both internal and external forces.

So much has been written about Saudi Arabia and Iran’s hegemonic pursuits in the Middle East. Neglected in many analyses, however, is a fair assessment of how internal (socioeconomic, historical and ideological) as well as external factors (geopolitical praxis exerted by key regional players) have given rise to a wider regional conflagration that threatens the peace and security of the entire region.

As Egypt and Saudi Arabia mull over plans to send ground troops into Yemen, one wonders about the denouement of Riyadh’s intervention against the backdrop of Iran’s ascendance; whether al-Qaeda and violent extremism will ultimately devour the Arabian Peninsula, or if a semblance of order will be restored…

[seperator style=”style1″]Sex Education is More Important Than We Think[/seperator]

© Shutterstock

It would be refreshing to see adults talk with frankness about sex.

I am a 19-year-old living in India, where it seems that every debate on sex education has its roots in birth control, safety and battling false information. While these perspectives are doubtlessly important, I have never looked at their pertinence from an emotional point of view.

I always thought we inevitably get the practical information about sex from our peers, much earlier than the high school syllabus even acknowledges it. The only chapter that talks about sex is on reproduction in biology, introduced in 10th grade. It covers all the systems of the human body, from circulatory to the nervous, and there are merely two pages devoted to sexual intercourse. On top of it, the content is in the most technical and distant language imaginable. While the chapter covers the technical aspects of reproduction, it doesn’t mention the word “sex” at all. Most prominence is given to how the baby…

[seperator style=”style1″]Is the Rising US Personal Savings Rate a Bane or Boon?[/seperator]

© Shutterstock

The rising personal savings rate may pave the way for strong consumer spending.

The financial crisis that crippled the US economy in 2007 shook the global landscape. The aftershock sent the markets into turmoil resulting in the Great Recession, which saw the US economy’s gross domestic product (GDP) shrink by “5.1% from the fourth quarter of 2007 to the second quarter of 2009.” The crisis affected most people and it clearly showcased the frailties in the modern economic system.

With a bevy of news reports focusing on financial derivatives to corporate malfeasance, the paltry American personal savings rate was an afterthought. According to economists at Wells Fargo, the savings measure can be thought of as “personal saving as a share of after-tax income.”

Kevin Lansing, a macroeconomic researcher from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, notes that since 2000, the average personal savings rate was 1.9%, in comparison to 5.2% in the 1990s. Lansing explains that the sharp reversals…

[seperator style=”style1″]Why Are Politicians Still Referring to Marijuana as a Gateway Drug?[/seperator]

© Shutterstock

Marijuana can help drug users prevent, control and even stop hard drug use.

With US states legalizing marijuana by popular vote, some politicians, including Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, are still calling marijuana a gateway drug.

The gateway theory argues that because heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine users often used marijuana before graduating to harder drugs, it must be a “gateway” to harder drug use. The theory implies that there is a casual mechanism that biologically sensitizes drug users, making them more willing to try — and more desirous of — harder drugs.

Yet the gateway hypothesis doesn’t make sense to those who use marijuana — or have used in the past. Research shows that the vast majority of marijuana users do not go on to use hard drugs. Most stop using after entering the adult social world of family and work.

So why is it still part of the rhetoric and controversy surrounding the drug?

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:�� / ��/��

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your ��is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post The World This Week: Triumph of South Africa’s Spirit Against Adversity appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Undoubtedly the most peculiar feature of the repressive system the Nationalist government set up in 1963 is that it put an inordinate, if not wholly unlimited, amount of power in the hands of a group of censors who saw themselves as the guardians of literature and, more specifically, an Afrikaner “Republic of Letters.”

This meant that the censors, who were, first and foremost, the agents of the government’s repressive anxieties about the medium of print (and film), and who were formally charged with the task of protecting the apartheid order from seditious, obscene, and blasphemous representations, were, at the same time, the apartheid regime’s literature police.

Historical Parallels

Calling this anomalous group of censors, which included influential literary academics, educationalists, and some writers, the “” carries certain risks, particularly in so far as the phrase conjures up a fantastically nightmarish Orwellian world and behind that the actual terror of censorship under the Soviet Union. Yet if any historical model is applicable to the South African case, then it is best to look to pre-revolutionary Russia, not to the Soviet Union, for a possible precedent.

Like the system established by the nineteenth-century tsars, apartheid censorship operated under a semblance of legality, not through a series of secret strictures and directives; it was essentially prohibitive, rather than prescriptive; and, most importantly, it functioned post-publication. Though had its own collaborationist publishing houses and writers’ groups, it had no equivalent of Glavlit, the Main Administration for Affairs of Literature and Publishing Houses, created in 1922, and no professional body comparable to the USSR Union of Writers, founded twelve years later, both of which served to reinforce a system of total control over the medium of print and, especially during the infamous era in the late 1940s – a strict aesthetic orthodoxy.

Unlike the Soviet regime, but like the earlier tsarist system, the apartheid bureaucracy was “essentially pragmatic,” as J. M. Coetzee put it, describing censorship in nineteenth-century Russia, in the sense that it required of the censors only “a capacity to sniff out contagion wherever it occurred,” not an elaborately articulated “theory of the censorable” and, in particular, “no aesthetic theory.”

And yet it is precisely at this point that the analogy with tsarist Russia itself begins to break down. If the apartheid censors were there primarily to protect the state from “contagion,” like their Russian precursors, they were, as they saw it, also there to safeguard literature from the “contagion” of the state, a complication that makes it difficult to see their role as “essentially pragmatic.” Though the archival evidence shows that blinkeredness, the vagaries of taste, and crude arbitrariness often affected their decisions, particularly on the question of what warranted protection as literature, it reveals that “aesthetic theory” of a sometimes fairly sophisticated sort played its part too. If this complicated the censor’s collaborationist expertise further still, it also raised questions about the status of literary experts in any legal or quasi-legal context.

A New Constitution

Since 1996, literature’s destiny in South Africa has been tied not just to a properly autonomous and still significantly transnational book trade, but to the chance of a multilingual constitutional democracy, of a unitary state with a strong internationalist orientation, of a reclaimed liberalism, and of a rights-based multi- or interculturalism.

At two key levels of legislation, however, it has also been linked to the inevitably uncertain guardianship of state-appointed literary experts. The of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, the supreme guarantor of its young democracy, includes a Bill of Rights, the most pertinent section of which states:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes—

(a) freedom of the press and other media;

(b) freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;

(c) freedom of artistic creativity; and

(d) academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.

2. The right in subsection (1) does not extend to—

(a) propaganda for war;

(b) incitement of imminent violence; or

(c) advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.

Given the history of apartheid , it is worth noting that clause 2 makes no reference to obscenity or blasphemy, or directly to sedition. Like all the rights in the founding Bill, those identified in section 16 are also subject to the proportionality clause (section 36), which allows for them to be restricted, under certain specified conditions, “to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom.”

This further provision, taken together with the specific inclusion of the “freedom of creative activity,” effectively ensures that the state functions not just as relatively disengaged guarantor of the rights underlying the “culture of debate” but as a potential participant in the “debate of culture.” It opens up a future role for literary (and other) experts within state structures, not, of course, as shadowy censors, but as witnesses who can be called on to testify on behalf of particular works in open court or other tribunals.

In response to secularist, liberal, or literary arguments against censorship, the committee upheld the right of some adult readers to make their own judgements about the novel and Rushdie’s commitment to literature as a space in which, as he put it in an interview in September 1988, “there are no subjects which are off limits.”

This possibility was strengthened under the Publications Act, 1996, another key legal instrument reflecting the importance officially accorded to literature and the arts in today’s South Africa. The new Act radically modernized the legislation. It followed the Bill of Rights by criminalizing the distribution of any publication which “judged in context” fell under any one or more of the three exclusions stipulated under section 16 (2). Yet, in a more surprising move, which effectively privileged the constitutional guarantees covering the “freedom of creative activity,” it explicitly exempted, among other things, what it called “bona fide” literary publications. It also applied this extra safeguard to its own provisions regarding publications given an XX classification, which criminalizes distribution, or an X18 rating, which restricts its sale to adults.

In legal terms, then, the new Act represents an emphatic break with the past. Reflecting internationally agreed norms, and the guarantees enshrined in the Bill of Rights, it rejects censorship in favour of classification, focuses on relatively measurable questions of harm, avoiding any reference to value-laden ideas of blasphemy or moral repugnance (i.e. obscenity), and affords literature explicit statutory protection.

Reality of Implementation

Yet when it came to the question of how the new Act might be implemented, it was decided against a system “based solely on criminal law” via the courts and against the option of self-regulation by the relevant media industries along the model of the film classification boards in the UK, the United States, and Germany.

Instead, the task group appointed to frame the new legislation successfully argued for an “administrative structure funded by the State, but which functions independently of government, and which draws on available expertise.” As a consequence, South Africa now has a national statutory Film and Publication Board (FPB) as well as a Review Board, comparable to the Offices of Film and Literature Classification in Australia and New Zealand, which is empowered to appoint literary experts to assist in its deliberations.

For all the similarities to the apartheid bureaucracy introduced in the early 1970s, the new structure, which came into operation in 1998, is different in a number of crucial respects. For one thing, the panel set up to advise the president on the appointment of FPB members is obliged to invite nominations from the general public. Whereas the old system had been dominated by a group of government appointees, all male Afrikaners, the first chair of the new Board, Dr Nana Makaula, was one of South Africa’s leading black woman academics with a background in psychology and education. The more robustly independent FPB also appoints its own “classification committees” and, at their request, its own experts.

Finally, when it comes to publications, the FPB, unlike the apartheid censorship bureaucracy, which was for the most part a conduit for submissions from the police and customs, responds only to complaints from the general public. Film distributors, by contrast, are required to apply for classification in advance.

In the absence of a substantial archive of decisions relating to publications – since 1998 the FPB has dealt primarily with films, DVDs, and issues of child pornography on the Internet – it is not possible to say what long-term cultural consequences this new democratic form of guardianship will have for literature.

The Satanic Verses: A Word Crime?��

Yet if the one key case considered in the first decade of the new system is anything to go by, it is clear that the future will be neither wholly predictable nor uncontroversial. In February 2002, when the 14-year-old ban on Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses was technically lifted under the terms of the new Act, many of the same local Muslim organizations who had campaigned against the novel in the apartheid era wrote to the FPB requesting that a ban be reimposed, some casting their objections in especially threatening terms.

Unlike the apartheid censors who originally banned The Satanic Verses on grounds of blasphemy in 1988, the new committee of experts considered both the text of the novel and the history of the furore it provoked in detail. Like their precursors, however, they accepted the complainants’ status as representatives and, as a consequence, the authority of their claim that the novel is “considered profoundly blasphemous and injurious by the Muslim community.” Yet they firmly rejected their view that The Satanic Verses still constituted a word crime.

Moreover, bearing in mind the terms of the Publications Act, it noted that “The Satanic Verses is without argument a bona fide literary work by a leading international literary figure.” For these reasons the committee concluded it was not “legally possible” to consider giving the novel an XX classification, which would, in effect, have banned it by “restricting all public access or possession.” In fact, as an unillustrated book, this would have criminalized its distribution only, which was prohibitive enough.

Yet, since few legal systems have, despite the changed media environment, entirely left behind the deeply entrenched anxieties about the medium of print, and none treat the freedom of expression as an unconditional absolute, adopting a policy of total disengagement in this area of the law is unlikely to be realizable in practice.

Strictly speaking, the committee had, at that point, fulfilled its obligations under the law. Yet, going against the precise terms of the Act, it decided to give the novel an X18 classification and, more controversially, to recommend that it “should not be for sale in public in South African commercial booksellers or any other commercial outlet, nor should it be available for borrowing from any municipal or public library” (this did not include legal deposit or university libraries).

As it noted, the restriction on display did not prevent a book-buyer from asking a local bookseller to order a copy for her, or, “given the transnational nature of the contemporary book trade,” from buying one for herself over the Internet. It did not consider the consequences of the curb on borrowing from public libraries, however, which effectively means only university students, or those who can afford to buy books, have relatively unhindered access to The Satanic Verses in South Africa today.

Despite this worrying omission, the ruling, which was accepted by the complainants and not contested by any other parties. In response to secularist, liberal, or literary arguments against censorship, the committee upheld the right of some adult readers to make their own judgements about the novel and Rushdie’s commitment to literature as a space in which, as he put it in an interview in September 1988, “there are no subjects which are off limits.”

In response to Muslim calls for an apartheid era ban to be reimposed, it offered not censorship (nor a reinstatement of blasphemy law) but recognition, at the level of the state, of the genuine offence many law-abiding South African Muslims feel the novel has caused them and their faith. In making this double move the FPB also implicitly acknowledged that literature, understood in Rushdie’s terms, has the power to produce shattering real-world effects.

Internet Publication

We cannot ignore the fact that in at least one important respect The Satanic Verses does not constitute a good test case for the new legislative framework in South Africa. Somewhat like D. H. Lawrence’s Lady Chatterley’s Lover in the landmark British and US trials of the late 1950s and early 1960s, its status as a “bona fide literary work” was, like Rushdie’s reputation, too securely established by 2002. It is possible to imagine other kinds of writing, say, a parody of vicious racist thinking or of pornographic violence against children published by a previously unknown author on the Internet, about which it might, in principle, be impossible for any classification committee or group of literary experts to reach a consensus.

Internet publication is especially testing in this context because it need not necessarily bring with it all the extrinsic markers of literary prestige (imprint, book format, paper quality, etc.) associated with the traditional medium of print. In the face of these difficulties, which will no doubt become more acute in the future, it is clear that continued faith in the authority of literary experts looks wishful.

Yet, since few legal systems have, despite the changed media environment, entirely left behind the deeply entrenched anxieties about the medium of print, and none treat the freedom of expression as an unconditional absolute, adopting a policy of total disengagement in this area of the law is unlikely to be realizable in practice. It is also at least debatable whether or not, in a just society, it is desirable in principle. Indeed, when modern democracies recognize literature as a public good, or afford it explicit legal protection, as South Africa does today, it could be argued that the question of the state’s juridical relationship to the field of culture has to be asked anew.

*[This article has been adapted from , by permission of . Copyright © All Rights Reserved.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

/��

The post The Literature Police: Apartheid Censorship and Its Cultural Consequences appeared first on 51�Թ�.

I was asked if I could write an opinion piece about independence day, as I have in previous years. But when asked, I realized I had nothing to say (yes, outspoken me).

For two years, and the decades-long struggle, I have been optimistic, albeit cautiously at times. Over the past five months, I’ve stopped writing about what I think of South Sudan. I’m disillusioned because the very people at the negotiating table who had all the power they needed before — but somehow could not place the public first — are the same people who can stop the madness, suffering, starvation and conflict. However, rather than bringing peace, they are busy carving out roles for themselves to lead the country into the future. No doubt any “new deal” will see a return to the status quo of anti-reintegration, power sharing and amnesty. Meanwhile, they have already proven they are unfit to play the leader, while there is little or no interest in justice or accountability for those who died.

And it’s not just South Sudan. I switch on the news to see that and are in yet another dangerous cycle of retaliation. More of the eye for an eye violence that we’ve grown up watching — always in shock of the horror and how quickly it escalates. The people of are now being collectively punished for decisions made by “their leaders,” while mothers once again bury their children after picking them up from the rubble. And yet some fail to see the humanity in the Palestinians’ suffering, while others fail to see the humanity of Israeli mothers, who also bury their children because they must bear the consequences for the privilege of living under the protection of their leaders and occupation. The suffering of the latter may make the headlines, but both sides suffer. Yet somehow by rationalizing that one side is “less human” makes it acceptable to unleash suffering.

Then I move on to my inbox, full of the same fear and scare tactics — admittedly in a different form — trying to make sure I too get caught up in the vitriol that has become two-party politics in the United States. I have become more than just a little disillusioned with the process: both parties finger pointing, blaming the other, rewriting and reclaiming history, while dangling our hard-won civil rights, reproductive rights and civil liberties in front of us to use as bargaining chips to settle political scores. We are the generation that has supposedly inherited a “post-racial” United States of America. Yet people who would otherwise have valid and legitimate grievances of how is running the country, instead choose to criticize him based on his skin color.

I live in post-apartheid , yet the police, mining companies and union bosses worked together to ensure miners’ dignities were denied. And when the miners were gunned down, somehow they were responsible for their own deaths because no one was held accountable.

We live in a world where we have access to more information than any other generation before us, thanks to the Internet. Yet some of us still choose to remain ignorant.

This is the same South Africa that saw its incumbent leaders flee to other African countries to seek refuge and support in fighting injustice at home. Yet these very African countries must now comply with “new pass laws” with South African authorities. Failing to produce the required papers, or even questioning the legality of the process, will have you harassed, bullied or thrown in jail.

We now live in a world where it is more dangerous for women in conflict zones than a soldier fighting a war. And where daughters are still fighting for justice against violence and for equal rights that their great-grandmothers had fought for.

Stand Up

Our generation didn’t start these fires, but are we ever going to try fight them? We live in a world where we have access to more information than any other generation before us, thanks to the Internet. Yet some of us still choose to remain ignorant and use information to prove our points rather than to try and see the flaws in our own logic. And for the very few who dare to see past their own privilege and try to help the plight of others, we are quick to ridicule them or are cynical about their armchair sympathy, verbal support and hashtag activism. Instead, we should laud the good intentions and the humanity of caring, or even provide an honest critique on how someone can redirect this energy to be more helpful.

Many of us quote passages on love, tolerance, freedom and rights written by those who came from a generation before us. Yet we never wonder why there’s a lack of enlightening, innovative or new contributions from our own generation.

So I find myself with nothing to write about South Sudan’s independence or the problems there, because sadly that country is not alone when it comes to suffering. I have nothing to write because I am trying to figure out how not to be so overwhelmed by it all. And I am trying to fathom how I can get my head out of the sand for long enough to discover how to balance the opportunities and wasted chances, the positives and negatives and, yes, how to help make it right.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

/

The post South Sudan Turns Three: Gaza, Obama and South Africa appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Joy Olivier, founder and director of����in , is on a mission to enable youth from disadvantaged communities to pull themselves and each other out of poverty, and into tertiary education and employment. With pay-it-forward as a core organizational value, Olivier’s organization was created for and is run by young volunteers comprised of former IkamvaYouth graduates, university students and professionals. They support and provide mentorship to help youth prepare for national exams and a brighter future in nine townships across South Africa.

Olivier was elected as an����in 2013, in recognition and support of her work as a leading social entrepreneur with an innovative solution to unemployment in Africa. In this interview with����of Ashoka, Olivier discusses the major challenges contributing to youth unemployment in South Africa, and outlines the key players that need to come together to solve this.

Ashoka:��Tell us about some of the young people who are drawn to IkamvaYouth: Where do they come from? What are their families like? What are their aspirations?

Joy Olivier:��All of our learners, or “Ikamvites,” live in townships in South Africa and most are living in poverty. Only 38% of Ikamvites live with their parents, 45% often go to bed hungry, and only 31% have their own desk or table at home. Most struggle with their studies and are victims of a South African education system in crisis, in which learners, whose parents without money, are most likely to remain in poverty themselves. An independent evaluation of our work in 2012��found that only 22% of our learners’ mothers and 15% of their fathers have matriculated (graduated) from high school. When parents have low educational outcomes, their children and children’s children are less likely to succeed in school, and are even less likely to secure meaningful employment later in life.

Ultimately, the Ikamvites are normal kids. They self-select into the program in hope of improving their chances in life and finding a sense of community. They keep their place in the IkamvaYouth program by meeting a minimum 75% attendance requirement throughout their last three years of schooling. So, while these learners most likely had pretty dismal academic grades when they joined, they are able to make significant strides and access tertiary education and employment. Since 2004, over 3,000 learners have gone through the program and 77% of those have accessed tertiary education, an internship or employment within two and a half months of matriculating.

Ashoka:��Can you share more about IkamvaYouth and the program that you have created?

Olivier:��IkamvaYouth was established in 2003 (formally registered in 2004). It is dedicated to creating a new link in South African society between successful high school graduates and their peers from disadvantaged backgrounds who need support in the final years of high school. By linking these groups, young people are invested in each other. They are guided by a common sense of shared responsibility, and are committed to significantly improving graduation results and access to tertiary education opportunities, so that every young person can find meaningful, dignified and sustainable employment in South Africa.

Currently, fewer than 10% of South African youth access higher education, of which only a fraction come from townships or rural communities. Poor matriculation results and low-awareness of post-school opportunities lead to high youth unemployment (estimated at over 60% alone in Khayelitsha, a South African township where our program is headquartered).

IkamvaYouth’s programs address these obstacles in simple, effective and measurable ways: supplementary tutoring to improve grades; career guidance to broaden learners’ horizons; mentoring to ensure that learners access available post-school opportunities; computer literacy to provide essential skills; and programs to enable youth to express themselves, build self-esteem and manage their nutrition, health outcomes and awareness of HIV/AIDS. Ikamvites participate in these programs after school, on Saturdays and during school holidays. By doing so, they are empowered to take their future into their own hands.

Ashoka: How does the pay-it-forward model work in practice?

Olivier:��The IkamvaYouth model provides the additional advantage of allowing former IkamvaYouth learners to be agents of change and shift from beneficiary to benefactor. Former learners, who gain entrance to tertiary institutions and return to tutor, drive the organization’s sustainability. More than half the volunteers at IkamvaYouth’s longer-established branches are alumni.

Ashoka: How does youth unemployment affect the lives of Ikamvites? What does youth unemployment look like at a national scale — societally, economically and culturally?

Olivier:��The correlation between educational attainment and employment prospects is clear. Those with tertiary qualifications are far more likely to access the labor market, with only 12.6% unemployment among holders of diplomas and higher certificates, and only 5.2% among those who have degrees.

The problem is twofold. Difficult socioeconomic conditions, combined with poor quality basic education reduce the chance for disadvantaged, mostly black, South Africans to achieve the matriculation results needed to access higher education. For those who do access higher education, the same socioeconomic challenges and legacy of poor schooling make it extremely difficult to succeed, resulting in high dropout rates. The struggling school and higher education systems, and a labor market that still demands a high percentage of ��skilled workers versus educated ones, result in young people who are “not in employment, education or training” known as NEET. According to StatsSA, more than 31% of South African 15-24-year-olds are NEET, representing a huge threat to South Africa’s future economic and social stability.

Watch��this video��by the South African National Planning Commission to understand the issue at scale.

Ashoka: Whose role is it to address youth unemployment? And whose job is it to create and ensure employment opportunities for South African youth?

Olivier:��The creation of more opportunities for meaningful youth employment is everyone’s job. The government, the private sector, secondary and tertiary education institutions, parents and the youth themselves are all collectively responsible. However, just because it sits with everyone, this does not mean that we need to wait for the most resourced, or powerful, or coordinated stakeholders to get things going. We all have a role to play and a huge stake in the outcome. The strong ties between education and employment do, however, call for immediate solutions to create a far more effective education system that has the capacity to decrease the numbers of young people who are unemployed, and improve their chances of securing a sustainable and fulfilling livelihood.

Ashoka: How would they go about doing this? Where would they start?

Olivier:��The huge gaps in basic literacy and numeracy are a good place to start. And unfortunately, the education system in South Africa is ill-equipped to address these alone. The gaps in learners’ comprehension and basic conceptual foundations mean they need individual attention to supplement their schooling. Supplementary support needs to be interwoven alongside the formal education system to assist learners whose parents are ill-equipped to provide academic support — peer-to-peer learning poses an economic and effective way to achieve this.

Watch this video that tells the story of a response to youth unemployment through a case study,��Funeka, created by IkamvaYouth.��While similar models for effectively addressing youth unemployment do exist, the challenge is in scaling these models so they meet the needs of a far greater percentage of disadvantaged South African youth. To meet this need, the government, the private sector, secondary and tertiary education institutions, parents and the youth themselves need to trust one another and, in turn, learn to collaborate, coordinate and share resources and approaches.

*[In partnership with��Ashoka’s initiative, which is finding innovations for youth employment in Africa, 51�Թ� explores the theme: Who is responsible for addressing youth employment in Africa? From June to September 2014, we will be developing online events and a series of articles that will gather multiple perspectives and provide a����analysis on the topic. Join the conversation by following and contributing to through social media channels.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

/ Shutterstock.com

The post IkamvaYouth: Tackling Education and Employment in South Africa appeared first on 51�Թ�.

In what has been dubbed the "Tweet heard around the world," Justine Sacco, former head of corporate communications at InterActiveCorp (IAC),  before stepping on a plane to Cape Town: "Going to Africa. Hope I don't get AIDS. Just kidding. I'm white!" Since the infamous tweet, Sacco has been removed from her position and has received widespread censure.

The shelf-life of Sacco’s Internet infamy is nearing its end — if it hasn't reached there already. The former public relations manager tweeted, traveled, apologized and was fired in quick succession, while the rest of the world has moved on even as it participates in shaming and "tsk-tsking." Much has been written about what Sacco did, and much has  about . But how does this affair reflect on Africa as a whole, as well as our perception of the continent?

There is an important place for anti-racist activity. Calling out racism, especially its structural manifestations, is a vital part of dismantling it. In fact, calling out a racist joke for being racist is something that needs to be done, but that shouldn't be the end of it. And yet, this is all that came from the Sacco affair. Instead, there should be an effort to have a broader discussion about why this incident happened in the first place.

Africa: The Constant Other

After all, Sacco could only think that AIDS being a (black) African disease was funny because, as notes: "It’s something that a lot of people actually, secretly believe, but feel precluded from openly saying, because, hmm, that sounds racist." 

Bady is also quick to point out that even the good-intentioned responses to the Sacco hubbub are tinged with racism, by turning Africa from the punchline of a joke into a . AIDS exists around the world, but today we raise money for AIDS victims only when they are from Africa.

Africa’s place has changed rapidly in the past decade. It has been depicted as a hopeless continent and a rising power, but almost never anything in between. Africa is submerged in war or crippled by corruption; it is creating vibrant art or innovating new technologies; and it continues to be an "other" that is not part of the conversation. 

The response to Sacco could easily be categorized as what David Brothers calls,  – a conversation that could be about AIDS in Africa is instead turned into a conversation about Sacco being racist, and the masses of the Internet were able to be not-as-racist-as-Sacco, while still largely enjoying the privilege of being white and not having AIDS.

Apologies and the Truth

It is a given that Sacco made a racist joke, while others can debate over whether her fate was just. In , Sacco said: "There is an AIDS crisis taking place in [South Africa], that we read about in America, but do not live with or face on a continuous basis." She also said that she was ashamed "for being insensitive to this crisis — which does not discriminate by race, gender or sexual orientation, but which terrifies us all uniformly." 

This is what we expect and even what we want her to say in an apology; however, what she said isn't entirely true.

AIDS does discriminate by race. It does this because our societies allow it to. Sacco’s joke is a joke precisely because it is true: being white means she probably will not get AIDS. The prevalence of HIV/AIDS for blacks in South Africa was . For whites it . While the conversation rightly lambasted Sacco for a stupid, awful joke – the discussion should also turn to why the AIDS crisis has unfolded the way that it has.

South African history, like much of African history, is fraught with racism that resulted in real damage to black lives and livelihoods. South Africa’s AIDS epidemic exists partially because of what colonialism and apartheid did to South African livelihoods — that much is clear. The forced migration, the damage to family life in rural tribal lands, and the lack of proper healthcare in predominantly black areas are all remnants of colonialism that have a hand in the current AIDS crisis. 

Sacco’s joke was hinged on this being clear. And yet, it seemed like people ostracized her not because they felt a need to help Africa fight the AIDS crisis, but because they needed to make sure they were not associated with her.

What Sacco’s tweet and the subsequent uproar show is that Africa is still absent from our consciousness. For both Sacco and her critics, Africa remains a place that one "goes," not where one "is." We should be talking about Africa, its good parts and its bad, as a part of the global community and not as an "other." If Africa really is "rising," as so many magazine covers have claimed, then it is time to engage the continent as an equal and not as a faraway place.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright © . All Rights Reserved

The post Tweeting Racism: Lessons From Justine Sacco’s Twitter Scandal appeared first on 51�Թ�.

On Sunday, we bid a final farewell to this generation’s most beloved leader. Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, a man for the ages, will be laid to rest. Leaders and dignitaries from all over the world have flocked to little-known Qunu, in South Africa, to see Mandela return to his roots, to the home of his people and the place of his childhood. Last Tuesday, a sea of world leaders arrived in Soweto to pay their final respects to a leader whose appeal transcended race, borders and beliefs. People turned up in the thousands and even a heavy downpour did little to dampen their spirits.

The Boy From Qunu

Mandela was a worthy heir to Mahatma Gandhi. He lives on in the hearts of many. His story is woven in bright colors that will refuse to fade with time. So profound was his influence and the reach of his example, so consummate was his work in altering the arc of history that the whole world mourns his loss whilst celebrating his life.

Throughout generations, in Africa and around the globe, many have heeded the call to serve and fight for freedom. Yet some precious few stand apart. Mandela is unique even in this group. His courage of conviction was such that he was prepared to die. His loyalty to those around him was absolute. His integrity was legendary. Despite its best efforts, the apartheid regime could never co-opt him. He carried himself with much pride and grace. Yet he was modest, engaging and courteous. He was Africa’s most celebrated son, and one of the greatest leaders to have ever graced the earth.

In 1918, Africa’s most challenging century bore its greatest son in Transkei, South Africa. “Rolihlahla,” which means troublemaker, rose to face the harsh repression of apartheid facing his people. Burdened by the weight of destiny, he stood up to be counted and became a willing advocate against the senseless chains clamping down on the rights of his people. A man with a wealth of flaws, he chose to pick up the gauntlet of a people’s struggles and carry the burden of their hopes. By so doing, he acquired the status of a saint.

He lived up to the immortalized words that he uttered at his trial before conviction:

"During my lifetime, I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to see realized. But… if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."

Chained But Free

Throughout his 27-year incarceration, Mandela remained unbowed by the backbreaking inclement habitat designed to shatter his resolve for the realization of an indivisible free nation. Through many a long day and night of confinement and the punishment of hard labor, he soldiered on and carried forth the indefatigable hope for a brighter tomorrow. In detention, he refused to settle for the allure of anything less than the Promised Land. Eventually, it was Mandela’s captors who recognized that they were in chains and set free a man whose spirit was always free.

Like the biblical David against Goliath, he unflinchingly took on the behemoth of intolerance and domination. He slayed the beast with the help of others — some well-known like Oliver Tambo, some who lived to see the day and fruits of freedom, and some who paid the ultimate price in terms of their lives for emancipation.

Father of the Nation

Upon his release, he opened the iron fist of oppression and by shaking hands with it, melted the grip of its ideology. By his indomitable courage, Mandela led his country to freedom. His empathy, compassion and magnanimity saved it from chaos, violence and civil war. A new and bright South Africa was thus born and Mandela came to be regarded as Tata, the father of this nation.

A nation is only as strong as its foundation. Mandela was the catalyst that brought divergent and apprehensive groups onto the negotiating table to hash out a new constitution. The negotiations demonstrated that unity was possible, true freedom for all was accessible, common ground was ample, and dialogue indispensable. Mandela inspired the promulgation of one of the most revolutionary constitutions in the world. Under South Africa’s constitution, the inherent right of equality of all people is sacrosanct — civil and political rights and socioeconomic rights are intrinsic.

During his "self-imposed" single-term presidency, Mandela focused on the task of uniting stubbornly disparate groups and peoples under the banner of a rainbow nation. Recognizing that healing and restoration was paramount, his government set up the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission to enable the nation to examine and acknowledge its painful past. Citizens were encouraged to embrace each other in the light of forgiveness, and to create a harmonious and inclusive society.

Mandela demonstrated by word and deed that all races could coexist in a unified country, sharing the same fundamental values. The powerful symbolism of his incarcerators sitting in the front row at his inauguration, shall forever prove that the power of forgiveness enables people to bridge any gap and heal any scar.

By voluntarily serving for only a single-term — a rare act in history — Mandela set an example to leaders across the globe, that power was but a means to an end and that leaders were merely servants of their people. He showed that for democracy to flourish, power must be relinquished even before one’s allotted constitutional mandate. He demonstrated that stepping down from power is a moral imperative, even if the masses clamor for a leader to continue in office.

Across the globe, Mandela stood for the oppressed and downtrodden with disregard to political correctness. He made no alliances out of political expediency. Instead, he championed the cause of peace and security, freedom and self-determination, and the recognition of the inherent rights and dignity of all humanity.

Flaws

Admittedly, as with all great leaders, it is important to interrogate all aspects of Mandela’s legacy. Even though he was a model statesman and charmed the world and a nation, he was far from a model father to his children. He is known to have engaged in infidelity, and his three marriages bring to question his commitment to the institution.

He regretted not having done more to stem the tide of HIV infection in South Africa while he was in office. During the freedom struggle, he abandoned Gandhian non-violence, and was the co-founder of Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation) — the armed-wing of the ANC — which engaged in acts of violence.

The man maketh the legend. Nonetheless, it is important to distinguish between the man and the legend. As a man, Mandela is thus blameworthy. His blemishes must be spoken of for the wider society to cite, criticize and learn from, as well as for all to appreciate the fact that he too was immensely flawed.

Greatness

Mandela’s courage in fighting against injustice and his compassion — even for those who wanted him dead — makes him a great man. A tall and handsome man, he was that rare book that could be judged by both its cover and its contents. At once, warm, humble and delightful to all and sundry who were fortunate to meet him in person, Mandela was also unremitting, ferocious and singular in the quest of his life’s mission.

As the African story rattles on, with its record of less than stellar leaders, Mandela will forever be a source of pride to his continent and a symbol for all humankind. His story shall be told in schools, at the kitchen table, in the open fields, and by the fireplace. Songs and books will continue to be written about him. He leaves but lives, especially through the ideals of peace, love, liberty, equality and harmony for all.

Goodbye, Tata.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Nelson Mandela: A Man for the Ages appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Those of us who were born in former European colonies have memories of our struggles for freedom seared into our souls. Just as Madiba heard the tales of “Dingane and Bambata, Hintsa and Makana, Squngthi and Dalasile, Moshoeshoe and Sekhukhuni,” fighting for their fatherland, I grew up with stories of the colonized who battled their masters and often lost their lives in the process. Madiba was spoken of in the same breath as Mahatma Gandhi.

Madiba continued the struggle that, as perhaps few know, Gandhi in South Africa. Gandhi was thrown out of a train by a white ticket collector in Pietermaritzburg on June 7, 1893, for having the temerity to travel in a carriage meant only for whites. The Indian barrister spent the night shivering in the train station and proceeded to launch nonviolent civil resistance movements against the South African government for the next 22 years. It was in South Africa that Gandhi began the work of dismantling the British Empire, and it was here that Madiba finished the job by destroying its last vestige — apartheid.

Colonization was inhuman. Those who were conquered lost their land, liberty and lives. Their dignity and identity were taken away from them. Madiba was Mandela’s Xhosa clan name, by which his countrymen know him. During colonization, natives frequently lost their language as well and, with time, their narratives. Christian missionaries worked hard to civilize natives, giving them names like Nelson.

The so-called rule of law imposed by Europeans was, in reality, a system that institutionalized inequity and made people slaves in their own homes. Native institutions such as the Thembu court of village elders that Madiba referred to as “democracy in its purest form,” were ripped apart and replaced by rapacious bureaucracies characterized by oppression and corruption. Apartheid was the last surviving example of colonization.

The memories of colonization and the struggle for freedom ran strong in my family. Even as a child, I grew up listening to stories about Gandhi. The fact that he eschewed violence and office, dressed in a homespun loincloth and died a martyr at the hands of a fanatic made Gandhi an iconic figure for my father’s generation.

In fact, my father’s first memory as a child is the day Gandhi died. It was the first day he went hungry. His mother was too distraught to cook. He was two days short of his fourth birthday, and even then, he realized that something momentous had happened.

I grew up watching Madiba and reading not only about his great achievements but also about his mistakes. Now that he is dead at 95, it seems the end of an era, and I have struggled to pen down my thoughts.

The era of independence

After World War II, one colony after another gained independence. It began with India under Gandhi in 1947 and intensified after the Anglo-French 1956 misadventure. The French tried to cling to their colonies more tenaciously than the British. France failed to realize that just as it did not like living under German rule, Algeria and Vietnam might have similar aspirations for independence. Britain kept playing up close trade ties and the security provided by its control of the seas to keep the colonies loyal to the Queen.

Still, it proved less sentimental about cutting them loose and initiated a massive wave of decolonization. In February 1960, British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan gave a historic in Cape Town, South Africa, where he spoke about “the wind of change blowing through this continent.”As the 1960s saw a massive wave of decolonization, South Africa slipped into the pernicious system of apartheid, a system of racial segregation enforced through legislation by its white minority.

By this time, the free-market model had been discredited in former colonies. In the past, this model included the freedom to trade slaves and the subjugation of the non-white world. In truth, under colonial masters such as the British and the French, free markets were hardly free — or even markets at all.

The colonies had experienced this policy and were now seeking alternative economic systems to address their deep problems of poverty and inequality. Even if they did not embrace communism, they were attracted by leftist ideas because they wanted to create more egalitarian societies after years of deep inequity.

The US did not quite understand these aspirations across Latin America, Africa and Asia. In 1953, it the first democratically elected government of Iran on the behest of the British. Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh had wanted 50 cents on every dollar paid to the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, the forerunner of BP. It was the same deal that Saudi Arabia had with the American company, Aramco, but the British wanted colonial-era exploitation to continue. By backing the British, the US established itself as the new imperial power that wanted freedom for white Europeans but enslavement for non-whites around the world.

In Africa, the US supported the interests of its imperial European allies. It backed the brutal British repression of the Mau Mau Revolt in Kenya. Over 1 million Kenyans were herded into detention camps known as , and more than 100,000 of them died. The eight-year campaign of terror in the 1950s included beatings, torture and sexual abuse.

In the Congo, the US went further. In 1960, it actively connived with Belgium and the UK to engender the murder of , the prime minister who had just led Congo to independence. , the man whom the US backed, went on to rule Congo for over three decades, murdering his opponents, looting the country and establishing a personality cult that rivaled that of North Korea.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the US also went on to play a in the 1962 arrest of Madiba. Henceforth, many saw the US as a white supremacist power and the CIA as an organization specializing in murder, torture and coup d’états.

The free-market model the US had been touting was now morally tainted. Washington was simply perceived as old European wine in a new American bottle, and the vast majority of former colonies were unwilling to drink it.

Coming of age��

The young Madiba was coming of age in the 1940s. As the rest of the world seemed to be marching to freedom, South Africa was turning back the clock. After the 1948 election, in which only whites were allowed to vote, long-standing discrimination was expanded and codified into legislation, inaugurating the apartheid era.

Madiba threw himself into the struggle to overthrow apartheid and embraced Marxism, partly influenced by friends and partly because the Soviet Union was supporting wars of independence in Latin America, Africa and Asia.

The apartheid government cloaked its suppression of the black majority in the garb of an anticommunist struggle. The Suppression of Communism of 1950 led to the creation of a brutal police state where suppression became the norm.

In February 1955, Madiba in the protest that failed to prevent the demolition of the all-black Sophiatown suburb of Johannesburg. This proved to be a turning point. He that the African National Congress (ANC) “had no alternative to armed and violent resistance” “the attacks of the wild beast cannot be averted with only bare hands.”

After the on March 21, 1960, Madiba cofounded the ANC’s armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe, or “Spear of the Nation,” which began guerrilla attacks against the apartheid government. On August 5, 1962, he was captured. �Ѳ��徱����’s conduct during the trial that followed made him a hero. Instead of defending himself, he set out to make a case for the moral bankruptcy of apartheid.

On October 15, he turned up in traditional garb, a made of leopard skin because, as he his white legal adviser, “I want our people to see me as a black man in the white man’s court.” He did that and more. In the years to come, the subsequent , named after the farmhouse where a number of ANC leaders were apprehended, would stand as a symbol of injustice throughout the world.

�Ѳ��徱����’s in the Rivonia Trial questioned the legitimacy of the court that was sentencing him. The trial had attracted enormous international attention, which might be the reason why Madiba was not sentenced to death. Instead, he was imprisoned for life, but only after his speech exposed the toxic nature of apartheid.��

He pointed out the terrible human and moral cost of white supremacy. He gave a harrowing account of how black Africans were denied schooling, jobs, liberty, the right to buy land and fundamental human rights. He pointed out how whites had dehumanized blacks by treating them as an inferior race. He called for equal political rights and declared that he was ready to die to achieve “the ideal of democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities.”

On June 12, 1964, Madiba was to prison. He spent the next 18 years as Prisoner 466/64 on Robben Island, a South African version of Alcatraz. On this cold and windy island, Madiba lived in a damp cell measuring eight by seven feet and slept on a straw mat. He suffered verbal and physical abuse. He was not allowed to use sunglasses in the lime quarry where prisoners were forced to break stones in blinding sunlight, permanently damaging his eyesight.

It was in prison that Madiba grew to greatness. He began the “University of Robben Island,” an informal school where prisoners lectured on their areas of expertise and debated contentious topics. He grew eggplants, tomatoes and strawberries.

Even in captivity, he continued to fight on. He insisted that prisoners be treated with dignity. He refused privileges that were not offered to fellow prisoners. He hated shorts but continued to wear them until other prisoners were allowed to wear trousers too.

It was at Robben Island that Madiba started learning Afrikaans in an effort to reach out to his captors and to win their respect. It was here that this hot-tempered former boxer learnt self-restraint and patience. Even when he was not allowed to attend the funerals of his mother and his firstborn son, he behaved with extraordinary dignity. In April 1982, he was transferred to Pollsmoor Prison, where he created a roof garden and shared what he grew with his prison warders.

As South Africa erupted in turmoil and international pressure mounted in February 1985, PW Botha, the apartheid leader known as “the crocodile,” to release Madiba if he renounced violence and other illegal activity. The offer was a ruse to discredit the ANC and paint it as a terrorist organization. Madiba rose to the occasion and asked Botha to renounce violence, dismantle apartheid and unban the ANC. He demanded freedom for the people and that he could not “sell the birthright of the people to be free.”

At Pollsmoor, Madiba contracted tuberculosis because of dank conditions. Whilst he was recovering, the government moved him to Victor Verster Prison in December 1988. By this time, negotiations had begun between Madiba and the government, which decided that he should be moved to a closer location. Finally, at 70, he had some comfort in the form of a warder’s cottage and a personal cook.

As the Cold War was ending and communism collapsed in Europe, apartheid started coming apart. After years of rebuffing Madiba, Botha invited him for tea. FW de Klerk, his successor, released all ANC prisoners except Madiba. When the Berlin Wall fell, de Klerk realized that the game was up and met Madiba in December.

On February 2, 1990, Mandela was pardoned unconditionally, and all formerly banned political parties were legalized. On , Madiba walked out of prison after spending nearly 28 years in captivity.

Reconciliation, not revenge

When Madiba was released, South Africa was a tinderbox waiting to explode. Not only was there tension between the white minority and the black majority, but there was also tension between the ANC and the Inkatha party. For a long time, funded by the apartheid regime, it was led by Chief Mangosuthu Buthulezi, who tried his best to derail the process to build a new democratic South Africa.

Despite having spent years in prison, Madiba acted with incredible astuteness to navigate the tricky post-apartheid process. Although he clashed with de Klerk and even called for a UN peacekeeping force in South Africa to stop state terrorism, he was nimble enough to reach a compromise.

It is easy to forget how explosive the situation was during the negotiations. Even before talks began, de Klerk asked Madiba not to include Joe Slovo, the Jewish leader of the South African Communist Party, in his delegation. Madiba slapped de Klerk down. He told de Klerk that both of them could choose anyone for their delegations, and that de Klerk had no right to tell him who to include or exclude.

Madiba turned up with a multiracial delegation that included Slovo, while de Klerk’s crew consisted of 11 Afrikaner men. Negotiations were testy and were frequently in danger of breaking down. The combination of various parties and factions within them, tribal rivalries and a resentful white minority threatened to explode into a cornucopia of violence.

As de Klerk and Madiba clashed, violence did break out. Far-right Afrikaner parties and black ethnic-secessionist groups like Inkatha made common cause. More people died between 1990 and 1994 than in the thirty years before. One by one, all sticking points were addressed. It was the much reviled Slovo who came up with the idea of the “.” This led to the breakthrough of , when both sides agreed to a five-year coalition government following the first election. All sides agreed upon guarantees and concessions.

Today, de Klerk and his team pay tribute to Slovo, who would not have been at the negotiating table if they had their way. The Record of Understanding was on September 26, 1992, by the government and the ANC. Next year, Madiba and de Klerk were the Nobel Peace Prize.

The next phase of negotiations continued to be tough, and violence continued. When ANC leader Chris Hani was in April 1993 by a far-right white immigrant, it seemed that the country was headed for disaster. Hani was second only to Madiba in popularity. A member of parliament who opposed dismantling apartheid had lent his pistol to the murderer.

Madiba was also dealing with personal tragedy. The ailing Oliver Tambo, his closest friend who had carried the torch as president of the ANC when Madiba was in prison, on April 24, 1993. Speaking at Tambo’s funeral, Madiba appealed for calm. He asked all South Africans to stand together for “the freedom of all of us” and pointed out that it was a white Afrikaner woman who called the police and identified the assassin. �Ѳ��徱����’s handling of the situation was one of his finest moments and contributed significantly to the successful conclusion of the negotiations.

Historic presidency: Truth and Reconciliation Commission

The 1994 elections led to an ANC victory, and Mandela became the of post-apartheid South Africa. He graciously allowed de Klerk to retain the presidential residence, which he called Genadendal, an Afrikaans word meaning “the valley of mercy”. It was an extraordinary gesture, and the years that Madiba spent learning Afrikaans came to good use to empathize with the white elite that felt insecure in the new Rainbow Nation, a term coined by Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Madiba showed tremendous magnanimity in meeting senior figures of the apartheid regime, that “courageous people do not fear forgiving, for the sake of peace.” He even the widow of Hendrik Verwoerd, the architect of apartheid.

Perhaps his most symbolic act as president was the Springboks, the much-reviled national rugby team. Black South Africans loved football — or soccer, as the Americans would say. Cricket and rugby were white sports. Rugby, in particular, was like religion for Afrikaans: a game of muscular, masculine camaraderie in which they excelled. Much to the discomfort of many of his supporters, Madiba threw his support behind the all-white Springboks team that won the World Cup at home, forging a new identity for the country.

As president, Madiba shepherded the young nation through the drafting of a new constitution. It came into effect on February 4, 1997, and has been widely regarded as one of the finest constitutions in the world. It guarantees civil liberties for everyone, minority protection, separation of powers and an independent judiciary. 

The beauty of the Constitution is that it involved massive public participation. People shared their views and sent suggestions that were incorporated into the document. It includes a famous Bill of Rights that promises the right to equality before the law and freedom from discrimination, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, color, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth. Kader Asmal and Albie Sachs, two noted jurists of Indian and Jewish origin, respectively, authored the bill, demonstrating the diversity and inclusivity of the new South Africa.

�Ѳ��徱����’s greatest achievement as president was the creation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (). Headed by Archbishop Tutu, its goal was to investigate crimes under apartheid by both the government and the ANC. It was highly controversial. Many believed that it allowed people to get away with murder and more.

The premise behind the TRC was exceedingly simple: the new nation had to forgive the sins of the past to forge a more harmonious future. For two years starting February 1996, the TRC conducted hearings of rapes, torture, bombings and murder.

The TRC remains controversial to this day. Many believe that it allowed the perpetrators of injustice to get off scot-free and that South Africa ought to have had trials as were conducted in Nuremberg.

The reality is that the TRC could never have achieved racial reconciliation or pleased everyone. It did achieve its purpose of finding out the truth about the crimes of the apartheid era and certainly contributed to a peaceful transition of power.

Tryst with greatness but feet of clay

A true test of greatness is whether a person can walk away from power. George Washington could have died in office, but chose to retire to his plantation. Gandhi had a near-divine status in India and chose his simple abode over the trappings of power.

In a continent first ravaged by colonization and then by “big men” who clung to power until they died, Madiba set a glorious example by leaving office after a single term. He could have easily stayed on for another term — even for life — but he retired to a life of simplicity and discouraged the development of a personality cult. He started spending his holidays in Qunu, the place where he spent his childhood. The house that he built there was based on the same cottage where he spent his last days in prison.

Like all great men, Madiba had his flaws. Like Gandhi, he was not the best father and had strained relations with his children. His marital problems are , as is his reputation as a ladies’ man. His second marriage to Winnie Madikizela was tumultuous. She was a feisty opponent of apartheid, but the struggle took a toll on her soul. She turned violent and vindictive, was convicted of kidnapping and fraud, and after their divorce, she lashed out against him for letting “blacks down.”

Mandela’s fondness for fine scarves, beautiful ties, flamboyant shirts and well-cut suits made him a dandy. Many joked about the number of times he would change his clothes throughout the day. His hobnobbing with celebrities was at times excessive.

Other mistakes had greater consequences. He admitted that, as president, he could have done more to combat the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In the past, his abandonment of nonviolence gave the apartheid government an excuse to intensify its oppression. They shrewdly painted Madiba as a communist, and both the US and UK backed the apartheid regime until its last days.

In fact, it was only in 2008 that the US took Madiba off its of terrorists. The armed struggle of the ANC was ineffectual and put no pressure on the apartheid government. Gandhian civil disobedience would have served the ANC much better. The ANC needed to focus on its internal organization and plan its next mass movement instead of launching ill-conceived guerrilla attacks.

After Gandhi’s first movement ended in 1922, he patiently focused on preparing his next move, which he only launched in 1930. In an act of breathtaking symbolism, Gandhi conducted an epic to the sea to break oppressive salt laws. This triggered a movement of civil disobedience that captured the imagination of the country and did much to propel India towards independence.

Gandhi had studied law in England, earned his spurs in South Africa, corresponded with Russian writer and religious thinker , had a mentor like and was a deeply spiritual man.��

Madiba was a different kettle of fish. A former boxer, he was more impulsive and lacked the international exposure of Gandhi. Madiba was also a product of his time when the US and the UK stood discredited and communism and socialism held sway. He was unable to realize that the Soviet Union was a brutal totalitarian state and that communism was doomed to failure. To his credit, though, in later life he would prove non-dogmatic and abandon his Marxist ideas for pluralist democracy.

Africa’s greatest son

Just as Gandhi did not singlehandedly win independence for India, Madiba did not demolish apartheid alone. A range of reasons, such as the end of the Cold War, increasing unrest, international sanctions and exhaustion of the ruling elite, combined to bring down apartheid. Others like Tambo, Tutu and de Klerk played their part. Yet, it was �Ѳ��徱����’s magnanimity, empathy and vision that led to the birth of the Rainbow Nation. 

South Africa still has a multitude of problems. After more than a century of oppression, the country’s problems were never going to be solved in less than two decades. Poverty is rife, crime is rampant and corruption is endemic. The current president is building a worth an estimated $20 million and has tried to stop the press from talking about it.

The country is an ongoing experiment in democracy, and it is because of Madiba that it has been able to embark on such a journey. After nearly three decades in prison, a lesser man might have come out bitter or broken. Madiba came out of the fire as tempered steel.

Even in prison, he a meeting in 1985 with the then minister of justice, Kobie Coetsee. He did not inform anyone in the ANC about it, and he did so because he believed that at times “a leader must move ahead of his flock.”

As a free man, he behaved in a Gandhian manner, urging forgiveness and reconciliation. The Afrikaans that he learned in prison charmed sworn enemies such as Botha. Without Madiba, the post-apartheid negotiations would not have been successful, and the subsequent elections would not have been largely peaceful.

He had the magnanimity to praise former US President Ronald Reagan and former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, two leaders who were the strongest supporters of apartheid. When he went to prison, he was influenced by socialist economic ideas. When he came out and saw the collapse of the Soviet system, he was willing to embrace the free market and build bridges with the business community. Most importantly, Madiba exchanged the trappings of power for a life of simplicity, setting a new example for Africa.

What he means to us

I have spent the past couple of days reading every obituary of Madiba, and it made me realize why I do what I do. I found much of the coverage about the man superficial. Most writers refused to delve deeper into the complexity of �Ѳ��徱����’s life and the context in which he operated. Too many conveniently put him on a pedestal and refused to engage with his legacy. The Economist, to its credit, produced an over 3,000-word obituary written with its customary panache. Yet, as I read it, I could not help but wince.

Earlier this year, when Margaret Thatcher died, this 1843 publication titled its obituary, “”, and declared that “the world needs to hold fast to Margaret Thatcher’s principles.” No mention was made of Thatcher’s support of apartheid. Bobby Sands, the member of the Irish Republican Army who died of a hunger strike in prison, was forgotten. He died because Thatcher would not countenance demands such as the right of free association with other prisoners and to organize educational and recreational pursuits.

The Economist has been a brilliant voice, but it is the voice of the Empire, and a strong British leader like Thatcher evokes subliminal nostalgia. The newspaper tries to condone her support for apartheid by blaming �Ѳ��徱����’s commitment to armed struggle, conveniently ignoring that she had no objections to the violence unleashed by the apartheid regime. 

When , the wife of , was killed by a parcel bomb in Mozambique, Thatcher said nothing. She had no objection to the attempted murder of by a car bomb that left him without an arm and an eye. For those of us who come from the erstwhile colonies, Gandhi and Madiba are freedom fighters, and it is their principles instead of Thatcher’s that the world needs to hold fast to.

The point that I am making is about narratives. All of history is mythology, and all of the news is fiction. For too long, the colonizers have told the story of the world. A look at the past issues of The Economist reveals that it never examined apartheid or condemned it in the same way as it deplored communism.

Even when talking of Madiba, it patronizes his “sub-Marxist drivel” whilst ignoring the ignominious record of the British government in supporting apartheid. It mentions Madiba and Gandhi in the same breath as Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt, Charles de Gaulle and Jack Kennedy when enumerating the greatest statesmen of the 20th century.

From my point of view, only Roosevelt can be compared to Gandhi and Madiba. Although indubitably brilliant, Churchill was an imperial racist. He that if granted independence, Indians would slip “into the barbarism and privations of the Middle Ages.” De Gaulle was far too authoritarian, capricious and selfish. He withdrew from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), plunged the European Economic Community (EEC) into crisis, tried to maintain France’s imperial role, treated student uprisings brutally and resigned only after losing a referendum. Kennedy does not have any substantial achievements to even merit consideration. Glamor alone does not make a man great. Roosevelt, with his New Deal, Atlantic Charter and support for the creation of the United Nations, is the only one who makes the cut.

I am making a simple point: the work of Gandhi and Madiba stands unfinished. The quest for freedom includes the expression of one’s narrative. The story of the world, which has long been told by a chosen few, now needs to be told by the world itself. In a 1994 interview, the legendary African writer Chinua Achebe quoted a — “that until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter.” Through 51�Թ�, we are setting out to ensure that “the story of the hunt will also reflect the agony, the travail—the bravery, even, of the lions.”

 Madiba, we owe this to you!

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Nelson Mandela: Mahatma Gandhi’s Heir and Africa’s Greatest Son appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Background

When Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela��was born in 1918, South Africa was a country entirely different from what it is today. Since colonial times, people of color in South Africa were seen as second-class citizens despite the clear non-white majority.

In 1948, when the National Party (NP) was elected, it institutionalized racial segregation with a policy of “apartheid.” Public services, resources and even living areas were allocated based upon race. Anyone not classified as white had to deal with being treated as inferior.

Like no other, Mandela’s life had always been closely connected to the history of South Africa and the struggle for racial equality.��Already before the NP came to power, Mandela had joined the African National Congress (ANC) which fought for the rights of South Africa’s non-white population. He quickly climbed the ladder of the party’s hierarchy and when apartheid was implemented, Mandela opposed it.

The more resistance against unequal treatment grew, the more the apartheid government tightened their grip. Mandela and some other leading ANC members were arrested multiple times. He was eventually sentenced to a lifetime in prison in the Rivonia Trial of 1964 and sent to the infamous Robben Island, where he would spend the next 20 years.

However, Mandela continued his struggle to end apartheid from within his cell and became a symbol of the fight for racial equality. He was seen as one of the world’s most famous prisoners, with people worldwide supporting his release.

The impression Mandela made on the world was not only due to the cause he was fighting for, but also because of the way he handled the consequences that came with the struggle. Even during his overall 27 years in prison, he maintained his poise and did not turn bitter. He was offered conditional release multiple times, but stayed true to his beliefs.

When he was finally released under internal and international pressure in 1990, the end of apartheid subsequently followed. And even after Mandela was elected as president of South Africa in 1994, he maintained a course that fostered reconciliation between different ethnic groups in the country rather than promoting revenge for all the years of oppression. He retired after one term in office, but remained politically active and engaged in the fight against HIV and Aids.

At the age of 95, Mandela passed away at his house in Johannesburg, South Africa on December 5, 2013.

Why is Nelson Mandela Relevant?

Over the years, the ANC may have lost some support amongst South Africans but “the father of the nation” never did. In all the years since he left office, Mandela remained one of the most well-known and beloved public figures in South Africa and beyond.

When news of his death reached the public, it spread like wildfire. The world collectively mourned and heads of states across the globe condoled. Meanwhile, South Africans gathered in front of Mandela’s house to express their grief over the loss of the country’s “greatest son,” as incumbent President Jacob Zuma had called him.

It now becomes clear that Mandela was more to South Africa and the world than just a former president. He has become a symbol of what one can achieve with true dedication to a cause, and a moral authority whose name inevitably stands tall alongside other freedom fighters, including Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.

Without Mandela, South Africa will surely be a different country. However, his role in shaping the nation and the impression he made on the world will never be forgotten.

*[Note: This article was updated on December 9, 2013.]

The post The Legacy of Nelson Mandela appeared first on 51�Թ�.

In an interview with 51�Թ�'s Africa Editor, , the Director of , Bernedette Muthien, talks about problems surrounding human trafficking for sexual exploitation and suggest ways to combat the practice.

Annika Schall: Where do victims of sexual trafficking in South Africa come from, and are some people more likely to become victims than others?

Bernedette Muthien: Sex trafficking affects people from South Africa, as well as victims coming from outside the country. Inside South Africa, sex trafficking often occurs from rural areas to urban ones. And also within cities, poor girls and women are often trafficked because they are more vulnerable. A rich woman would not find herself as a victim of sex trafficking as easily as someone struggling to make ends meet. Migrant and refugee women are also more exposed to danger, and we have many refugees and migrants in the country.

Moreover, sex trafficking from other African countries affects South Africa. For instance, Nigeria is one of the larger nations from where women are brought to South Africa in that particular way. And then there’s sex trafficking from other parts of the world from outside of Africa, particularly from Asia — for example, the Thai sex industry reaches many parts of the world.

Schall: What role does organized crime play in sex trafficking?

Muthien: Criminals are entrepreneurs. They are very clever and act in a market-driven way. So, the problem with things like sex trafficking or the drug trade is that as long as there is a market for the product, the industry will remain. Usually, these criminals diversify. They do a range of things, including the trafficking of women, drugs and guns.

Notably, drug and sex trafficking are very connected. The victims are often forcefully addicted to drugs, in order to make them perform the services they do in the industry. They are raped and brutalized so they have more of a victim mentality, and therefore, become like slaves who will be more easily manageable. 

Under Apartheid in South Africa, our borders were efficiently sealed as the Apartheid government was very interested in keeping the country closed and isolated — especially from what they called “terrorist’ threats.”

But in the early 1990s, we had a huge influx of international criminal gangs from the Balkans, Russia and other places like Nigeria. These gangs set up their businesses here in South Africa with great success, often in collaboration with senior police officers. For example, we had a brothel located right opposite the entrance to the parliament. This brothel couldn’t be closed for many years, despite the fact that it was illegal and had many illegal women working there. (“Illegal” meaning they didn’t have proper documents and came from Eastern Europe and Asia.) When it was eventually shut down, people found out who it was actually serving: the higher echelons of society, business, and government.

Schall: So do you think tighter border control would help?

Muthien: No, tighter border controls don’t necessarily work. What we need are more efficient solutions; we need a less corrupt government. We even had senior police and other government officials dismissed from service, who were associated with international organized crime. But with regard to sex trafficking, we really need to work on the issues that make women vulnerable to it and in turn, offer women alternatives and work with developing women and developing communities.

The other part of it is, we need to work on the demand side of it: we need to work with men. With men who treat women as a commodity that they can just purchase to satisfy whatever need they may have. There are much deeper issues we need to address other than just tightening our borders. We need to work on both the desperation of women that force them into these untenable choices, as well as the demand side from men.

Schall: Just recently, the Prevention and Combating of Trafficking in Persons Bill was signed into law. It specifically seeks to tackle the issue of human trafficking. Do you think this is an improvement, and how has the judicial system been dealing with the issue so far?

Muthien: Laws are always helpful, because without them you have nothing. But for them to actually provide some kind of protection and to not only exist on paper, society and the system need to comply with the law. That means to educate everybody and to ensure they have good enough officers in the criminal and justice system.

We do have very good legislation in general, but our criminal justice system is not very efficient when it comes to implementing a lot of these laws. Various police officers themselves have been found guilty of criminal acts, including the rape of women or even murder. And often they are not prosecuted and dismissed, and continue to serve.

Indeed, there is not much confidence in the legal system. However, some good work has already been done in the past. For example, some traffickers have been prosecuted, including members of the police that were involved in organized crime as well as some criminal leaders.

But there is still much that needs to be done. Organized criminals are still involved in drugs, sex trafficking, and all kinds of criminal activities. They are also involved in the nightclub scene. If you want to open a legal nightclub, then you have great trouble as you have to pay bribes for protection. 

Schall: For women trying to escape their traffickers, what are the challenges they face and what is the infrastructure for victims like?

Muthien: We have many shelters in South Africa. Even some of the poorest communities have shelters. Around the corner from where I live, in a bohemian neighborhood, there is a shelter. We also have social services provided to women and we have social workers. So there are services, but sometimes it’s difficult to gain access to them or even to know they are available and where to find them. Sometimes they charge a fee.

But even if people manage to access these services, there are further questions. If women are going to live in a shelter, how long can they stay there? Usually women can only stay for a limited time, a few weeks. There are employment problems too. What to do if you have no education? How can those women find a job to support themselves? It’s really most challenging, practically. Then there are legal issues about drug addiction. Or if they came from another country and find themselves in South Africa without proper documents, then that person will have even greater difficulties. It’s really not an easy situation; with or without laws.

Schall: How is sex work – forced or not – perceived in South Africa in general?

Muthien: We are having two discourses in South Africa that have been around for several years. One discourse sees sex workers as free to choose — where it is said that for them, it is just a job and they prefer to make the same money in a ten-minute session that they would get for several hours in a factory. The other discourse looks at sex work as a crime and wants to eradicate it.

I don’t prefer one discourse over the other. I respect sex workers as they say they are in charge of their own bodies and their own lives, and that it is their choice. But sex work is often still exploitative.

However, given these two opposing discussions — which are not specific to South Africa but exist the world over — it is very difficult for people to have a coherent voice in public and to produce material to educate and inform in concise manner.

There are some initiatives by sex workers to allow other sex workers to choose for themselves — like the organization , who work to prosecute policemen who abuse sex workers. And there’s another organization called Embrace Dignity, which tries to offer different programs for women with regards to the so-called rehabilitation of prostitutes.

Ultimately, for me, I do not have the arrogance to argue with someone who says they define themselves — they have choice and agency, with albeit limited alternatives. If a sex worker tells me that is what she is, I cannot deny her the right to define herself; I cannot insist on calling her a prostitute and try to “rescue” her. On the other hand, if a woman asks for help, if she calls herself a prostitute, a victim, and if she says she is trafficked, of course one should immediately support her.

So for me, there is no schism between the sex worker movements and that of the people supporting prostitute “rehabilitation,” and who provide necessary support for trafficking against women and children. All efforts should help combat the demand from men, which is patriarchally-driven; and the exploitation of women, whether they choose their forms of exploitation or not. All efforts should work towards the eradication of patriarchy, which is the source of all this ghastly systemic abuse of women and children. Patriarchy is the source of all violence.

Schall: So do you think legalizing prostitution would make a difference and may even help tackle sex trafficking?

Muthien: More than a decade ago, my colleagues and I conducted international surveys to understand how other parts of the world deal with the matter. Some are criminalizing: either prosecuting the sex worker or the buyer of sex. Others are decriminalizing. So there are various options.

I would prefer to make sex workers decide amongst themselves what would be the most viable options for them. But I really like the way Iceland handles it. The president and former head of state is a woman and a lesbian in a long-term relationship. Pornography is banned there, as well as lap dancing. I don’t like banning anything because I come from Apartheid where they banned everybody and everything; but I like the idea of having such a firm position on the matter. Even some of my friends who are feminists go to these lap dancing places. It is that pervasive, viewing women’s bodies as mere objects and disembodied sites of the viewers’ desires — stripping these performing bodies of agency and their own satisfaction, it mimics a voyeuristic form of rape, I might suggest.

For myself, the solution is about addressing the underlying issues. The roots are in the system itself: in patriarchy and capitalism which exploits people in general and women in particular. We need to tackle it as a multidimensional and deep-rooted problem. Why do women feel that their bodies are not valuable and that they can just throw them away? Why do some people exploit, abuse and dominate other people?

If we work on these deeper issues, then I would argue that we would not have the problem in the first place. There would only be respect and care for self and others, and desire that is mutual and free of exploitation and commerce.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright ©  All Rights Reserved

The post Exploitation and Commerce: Sex Trafficking in South Africa appeared first on 51�Թ�.

By Michael Kahn

Robert Gabriel Mugabe of the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), won a seventh term as leader of the government of Zimbabwe. In polls on July 31, ZANU-PF received around 61% of the votes.

The victory surprised only those who lost in the elections. Most independent observers agreed that the polling was conducted peacefully and was therefore “free.” But was it fair? Mounting evidence suggests it was not.

In the 2008 elections, the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) had won the first round, but in the face of violence declined to participate in the run-off, thereby giving President Mugabe his sixth term of office.

At the time, the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the economic bloc comprising 15 sub-equatorial African states, brokered a compromise whereby a government of national unity was put in place through a mechanism known as the Global Political Agreement (GPA). The GPA was also to provide the tools to develop trust and build independent institutions that would create the means and atmosphere for a future free and fair election.

The MDC then entered into a power-sharing arrangement with ZANU-PF that left the security forces, judiciary, and mass communications in the hands of the latter. It is this monopoly hold over the levers of state power that provided the space for the manipulation of the electoral process.

Rigged elections?

Evidence of rigging in the 2013 elections, or massive incompetence, has since come to light through the investigations the Zimbabwe Election Support Network (ZESN), an independent organization. According to ZESN, the voters’ roll showed 6.9 million eligible voters. This, by law, excludes the roughly 3 million Zimbabweans who have fled their homeland in the last decade as a consequence of economic hardship and political violence.

The roll itself is of dubious quality. The ZESN found that nearly 1 million persons on the roll were deceased, and another 100,000 were aged over 100 years. In rural constituencies, the roll showed more voters than residents; in urban areas, the very places where MDC has its support base, the roll included only about two-thirds of the number of age-appropriate voters. In general, voters in the 18-25 age group were under-registered. To top it all, an extra 2 million ballot papers were printed, giving rise to fears of ballot stuffing.

How, then, has the outcome been judged? The SADC has thus far refrained from endorsing the credibility of the elections; though Botswana expressed its disappointment at the process. On the other hand, the African Union spokesman, former Nigerian President Olegesun Obesanjo, called the poll “free and credible.” The United Kingdom, United States, and Australia were critical of the electoral process.

President Jacob Zuma of South Africa offered his “profound” congratulations, stating that the “will of the people” was met. Zuma’s endorsement of the election outcome is a reminder that, for many observers, South Africa’s foreign policy follows a curious path.

Reactions from South Africa and Effects on the Economy

In the first flush of the Nelson Mandela government, there was an expectation that the nation’s foreign policy would be guided by the principles of its own Bill of Rights – that the human rights and fundamental freedoms assured to its own citizens would apply to foreign policy as well.

This did not come to pass, with early rebuffs, most notably with the failure of Mandela to prevent the 1995 execution of Nigerian writer Kenule Saro-Wiwa. There were, however, some diplomatic successes for South Africa: as interlocutor between Libya and UK; as mediator in the Great Lakes region; and as peace broker in the Democratic Republic of Congo. But nearer to home, things were cloudy.

Making sense of the stance of the Thabo Mbeki and Zuma administration on Zimbabwe is no easy task. For a start, during South Africa’s liberation war from 1960-1990, the African National Congress derived its main support from the Soviet bloc. In keeping with this position, it was an ally of the Zimbabwe African Peoples’ Union, with a strong following in the small Zimbabwean working class. Mugabe’s ZANU, bordering Mozambique, enjoyed Chinese support, as did Samora Machel’s Mozambique Liberation Front (or FRELIMO) in Maputo.

This ideological divide made for a fraught relationship between the ANC and post-1980 independent Zimbabwe. It is revisionism to claim that the ANC and ZANU were brothers-in-arms and that this brotherhood explains ANC’s present support for Mugabe.

After the 1994 accession to power by the ANC, South Africa’s rise in diplomatic standing on the continent posed a challenge to Zimbabwe, which had positioned itself as the political leader of SADC. From 2003, as the largely self-induced economic crisis in Zimbabwe deepened and hyperinflation ensued, Zimbabwe became more strongly antagonistic toward its previous rulers in Whitehall.

South African diplomats found themselves drawn into a re-run of the Cold War. Africa was not to be a plaything for the West; Africans would find African solutions to their problems; Africans would find partners of their own choosing. States such as China, which respected this dynamic, would be welcomed. Zimbabwe declared a “look east” policy. And, to an extent, South Africa has now done the same, marching to the soft beat of a Beijing drum.

Now, even as the MDC complains that the election was stolen, Pretoria appears to be satisfied with the promise of stability. After all, South African mining, agriculture, and financial service companies are heavily involved in Zimbabwe, and they too might benefit from stability.

But the situation is more complex than that. ZANU is determined to “indigenize” the economy, with equity transfers from foreign-owned companies to Zimbabweans. In anticipation of such a move, the ZANU victory triggered a sell-off on the Harare Stock Exchange, whose index plunged 11%. Some counters shed up to a quarter of their market cap.

With ZANU’s hegemony re-established after the recent election, the government is now free to advance its economic agenda in concert with parties that abide by its rules. But investors want clarity – will this desire be met?

*[Note: Dr. Michael Kahn is a policy analyst on research and innovation. He has been  advisor to the South African government, professor of science education in Botswana and South Africa, and Executive Director of the Human Sciences Research Council. He is presently a consultant to governments, multilateral and donor organisations, and Professor Extraordinaire at the University of Stellenbosch. This article was originally published by ]

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright © . All Rights Reserved

The post Zimbabwe: The Road to Stability? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

It has been a year since 34 striking miners were shot dead by police at Lonmin's platinum mine in Marikana, South Africa. What appeared to be a conflict between miners and police was in reality more complex: It was a war between miners themselves. That war, tragically, continues today.

I visited Marikana on Monday, to research a story about life at the mines one year after the massacre. By 11am that morning, a mineworker had been shot dead outside her home within the mine's married quarters. The mineworker was a mother of three, and a foster mother to a further three children, who worked as a shop steward for the National Union of Mineworkers. Her colleagues told me they have little doubt she was killed for her role in the union.

The murder is the latest in a string of tit for tat killings between the established National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) and the radical Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (AMCU). Several union members have been shot on both sides, as the two unions vie for power.

Ongoing Conflict

The NUM is part of COSATU, the group of unions that forms the tripartite alliance with the ANC and the South African Communist Party. Trade unions such as NUM played a massive role in the fight against apartheid. Yet the hope and unity of those days has degenerated into the inter-union rivalry we see today.

It is easily forgotten that the police intervened last year because of violence between the unions. Ten people died in the days preceding the massacre on August 16, 2012, in a dispute over a wildcat strike, which AMCU supported but NUM did not.

That divide is as deep as ever — and is becoming increasingly violent. Tension between the two unions has intensified in recent months, as the AMCU toppled the NUM as the biggest union in the platinum industry. The AMCU is now officially the majority union at Lonmin, with over 60 percent of the miners on its books. How it achieved this success is questionable, however.

Fear and Intimidation

"One of the strategies of these people is to instil fear on our members, for them to be scared to belong to NUM," said Mxhasi Sithethi, NUM's regional organizer. "That's why they keep terrorizing people."

It is not just NUM members being terrorized. AMCU members are also being threatened and killed. But no matter which side the miners fall on, they are united in one aspect: fear.

"Everybody's scared, everybody's scared," said Thandi Mateyisa, the latest victim's niece. "You start talking, you start doing anything, so you don't know what might happen to you."

As a result of this fear, witnesses are too scared to speak out and perpetrators go unpunished. The atmosphere after Monday's shooting was eery. Neighbors stood quietly around the body of their friend, refusing to testify against the person who had shot her in broad daylight. One of the reasons for keeping quiet is a lack of trust in the police.

"We don't see any reaction from the police. There is no security, we are not secure," said Adelaide Mfana, a friend of the dead woman.

In public, the leaders of both unions have been calling for an end to the killings. AMCU President Joseph Mathunjwa recently invited his NUM counterpart to help lead a memorial for the victims of the Marikana massacre, "to preach peace and demonstrate that workers' unity is a strength." Yet their soothing words have made little difference so far.

More than Random Violence

It is impossible to know how much violence at a grassroots level is coordinated from the top, since police have failed to charge anyone in relation to these murders. But I find it hard to believe that union leaders are unaware of the intimidation, abuse, and killings that go on between their members on a daily basis.

A disturbing factor has been how many of the killings have been carried out in an "execution style" with a single bullet. Monday's victim was shot once, through her back, according to police on the ground.

Could these murders be carried out by random criminal elements? Or are they in fact orchestrated? And where is Lonmin in all this? Should they not be doing more?

The question is where we go from here. Union leaders are making the right noises, but now is the time to take action. Something needs to be done to stop these killings, and bring an end to the fear which pervades the homes and mines of Marikana.

Would it not be a fitting memorial to those 34 miners if, instead of planting crosses and singing hymns, we found a way to stop more lives being claimed? 

*[Note: This article represents the views of the author and not the perspectives of AFP.]

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright © . All Rights Reserved

The post Marikana: The Massacre After the Massacre appeared first on 51�Թ�.

By Paul J. H. Schoemaker

The life story of Nelson Mandela is well known, and has elevated him to the level of such widely recognized heroes as Mahatma Gandhi and Mother Teresa. There is indeed much courage, sacrifice, wisdom and nobility in his life — attributes that demand our deep respect and have much to teach us.

What is less well-known is how Mandela evolved into the kind of strategic leader who, from prisons on Robben Island and elsewhere, helped to bring genuine democracy to South Africa. For example, while isolated from his fellow prisoners by force, he steered secret government meetings toward the abolishment of apartheid and free elections. Subsequent to that, he became the country's first democratically elected black president.

Mandela's remarkable story holds valuable lessons for other leaders involved in deep struggles, foremost among which are the importance of holding firm to a morally just vision and the ability to influence a sequence of key strategic decisions over time (decades, in his case) in order to bring about truly remarkable results.

Three decisions especially stand out in Mandela's evolution as a strategic leader. To appreciate these fully, however, we need to understand some of the social and political contexts that shaped his career and values.

A Life Sentence

Mandela was born in 1918. His father was a top adviser to a tribal royal family (the ) and helped elect the tribe's new chief who later — after Mandela's father died — took the young boy into his own family. This path led Mandela from an isolated small village upbringing to the center of tribal power in his teens, which in turn awakened his interest in education and politics. He studied law at the and early on became involved in anti-colonial politics. Mandela was a founding member of the inside the African National Congress (ANC), the main black political party of South Africa, which was later outlawed and banned by the government. The country's ruling party, the National Party (NP), started to implement a strategy of strict racial segregation, later known as apartheid, after coming to power in 1948.

Mandela obtained prominence in the ANC through his liberal political views and opposition activities, especially the Defiance Campaign of 1952. He was at first committed to non-violence, inspired by Gandhi's successful opposition to British colonial rule in India. But eventually, due to the government's harsh measures against non-violent opposition, he became increasingly drawn to various forms of targeted sabotage — actions that resulted in numerous arrests. In 1961, he co-founded a militant wing in partnership with the South African Communist Party and was eventually convicted of treason. Mandela was spared the death sentence, but was condemned to life in prison. He served a total of 27 years. In 1994, he became the country's president.

While in prison, Mandela stood out — among both prisoners and guards — as highly principled, respectful, dignified and willing to sacrifice his life for his beliefs. Many of his fellow political prisoners were heroic as well. Most were well trained, and they taught each other about their respective fields of expertise while working in the limestone quarry. Prison life was harsh, with bad food, cold sleeping conditions in the winter and long periods of loneliness. Mandela fell ill intermittently and contracted nasty lung infections, including tuberculosis, due to his years in damp prison cells.

Despite these conditions, he was able to write an influential autobiography in secret titled, Long Walk to Freedom, which chronicles his life in detail against the backdrop of deep social injustice and harsh state oppression. This clandestine book was smuggled out in pieces and printed overseas when finished. It became a global best-seller. An international freedom campaign by the ANC, led by the exiled leader Oliver Tambo, had managed to make Mandela the poster child of opposition to apartheid as well as an eloquent spokesman for a new democratic South Africa.

The world took notice: International businesses as well as governments increasingly boycotted South Africa during the 1980s. The NP's unyielding stance, especially President P. W. Botha's dogmatic hardline approach and focus on law and order, made the NP a pariah on the global stage. Business leaders from Anglo America and other local companies were increasingly putting pressure on Botha and later on his successor, F. W. de Klerk, to change course. Also, young whites voiced their opposition to apartheid and racism in churches, schools, social clubs, work settings and at home with their parents. Eventually even the Dutch Reformed church, which had given apartheid proponents dubious biblical justification for the segregation of races, changed its views. Very slowly, the Afrikaner leadership started negotiations with Mandela in prison. It was a form of intermittent shuttle diplomacy, with government leaders visiting him in person, sympathetic white guards passing messages to and from the ANC, and Mandela being flown from his new prison house near Cape Town to meet in secret with Botha and later de Klerk in the capital of Pretoria.

President de Klerk's back was very much against the wall in 1990. The economy was suffering from the boycotts; business leaders wanted change; the containment strategy of carving out Home Lands for blacks was failing, and the country was on the brink of civil war in black townships. Something had to give, and it happened in de Klerk's seminal opening speech to parliament in February 1990. He called for free democratic elections (one man, one vote), as well as the unconditional release of all non-violent political prisoners. In addition, he lifted the ban on the ANC and many other outlawed parties.

This was a watershed event since whites were a minority in the country and would surely lose political power through these declarations. De Klerk kept his promises and released political prisoners, although not Mandela at first, given his violent past. De Klerk was hoping for a power sharing arrangement with the ANC, but this eventually proved to be naive on the part of this otherwise very pragmatic NP leader. De Klerk and Mandela were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993 for achieving a largely non-violent, voluntary transfer of power by a strong minority group to a hostile majority, a rare event in human history.

The Face of the Opposition

Against this complex backdrop, three strategic decisions by Mandela — among many others — stand out from a leadership perspective. The first occurred when Mandela was offered a conditional release from prison by the government. In a 1985 speech to the nation, President Botha offered Mandela freedom if he renounced violence and other illegal activity. The president tried to shift the blame for imprisonment to Mandela himself; after all, he was free to go now, provided he would be law abiding. Mandela did not fall for this transparent ploy. Yes, he very much desired freedom after decades of hard labor and confinement in a small cell. But he also felt it would betray his principles, his leadership and the ANC's long struggle. Here is how Mandela replied, in part, to President Botha's disingenuous offer:

"What freedom am I being offered while the organization of the people remains banned?… What freedom am I being offered if I must ask permission to live in an urban area?… Only free men can negotiate. Prisoners cannot enter into contracts."

Mandela turned down the president and opted to stay in his cold, dark prison cell — about eight feet by eight feet in size — and was prepared to serve out the remainder of his life sentence. This key decision was strategic since it greatly elevated his position as the face of the ANC, while also drawing attention to his enormous personal sacrifice. In addition, it revealed Mandela's keen situational awareness that political change would come soon, even though he was isolated from the news media and poorly informed about developments in the country. Mandela's intuition proved right: Half a decade later, this man of deep principle was released unconditionally and rose to become the president of the ANC and then the country.

The second strategic decision occurred shortly after Mandela became a free man, but before being elected president in 1994. The trigger was the 1993 assassination of Chris Hani, a well-known and popular black leader fighting for equal rights. Hani was shot in cold blood by a far right white immigrant when stepping out of his car in the street. The killer was identified by a white woman who turned him in. This targeted killing was the flame that ignited a tinder box, resulting in widespread demonstrations against the white racist government. Many blacks wanted revenge, and the atmosphere was ripe for looting, violence and mayhem. Recently out of prison, Mandela rose to the occasion and appealed for calm. Here is part of what he said:

"Tonight, I am reaching out to every single South African, black and white, from the very depths of my being. A white man, full of prejudice and hate, came to our country and committed a deed so foul that our whole nation now teeters on the brink of disaster. A white woman, of Afrikaner origin, risked her life so that we may know, and bring to justice, this assassin. The cold-blooded murder of Chris Hani has sent shock waves throughout the country and the world… Now is the time for all South Africans to stand together against those who, from any quarter, wish to destroy what Chris Hani gave his life for — the freedom of all of us."

His third strategic decision occurred in his 1994 speech after his election as president of South Africa, which he served for only one term although two were possible under the constitution. His early decision not to stand for a second term was a remarkable gesture in a country and continent where leaders seek maximum power (such as Robert Mugabe, president of Zimbabwe). Mandela knew that his speech would be watched by about a billion people on television around the world, and he wanted to signal clearly that he represented all the people of his country, regardless of color. Some of his lines are famous now and are inscribed in stone on Robben Island. Here is part of what he said:

"We have, at last, achieved our political emancipation. We pledge ourselves to liberate all our people from the continuing bondage of poverty, deprivation, suffering, gender and other discriminations. Never, never and never again shall this beautiful land experience the oppression of one by another… The sun shall never set on so glorious a human achievement. Let freedom reign. God bless Africa."

Mandela recognized full well that South Africa could easily fall back into civil war due to the many crimes, injustices and deep wounds inflicted by the apartheid regime. He also knew an all-out war would at best yield a Pyrrhic victory. Furthermore, much of the expertise needed to run the country's business, legal, social and educational institutions resided within the white minority population. Having seen what happened in nearby Zimbabwe under Mugabe's corrupt leadership, whites feared for their future, and many left the country (a brain drain known as white flight). Mandela's aim was to rise above past injustices, embrace Archbishop Tutu's call for truth and reconciliation, and unify the country by focusing on a shared, democratic future.

The key to Mandela's leadership was to encourage racial harmony, forgiveness without forgetting, power sharing and a strong focus on the future, not the past. As a master of symbolism, Mandela supported this strategy by being magnanimous toward his former enemies. For example, in 1995, he visited the widow of the very man who was the main architect of the apartheid regime and in effect put him in prison (Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd). He rejoiced when the national rugby team Springboks won the world championship, even though this team had been a symbol of racism and Afrikaner power for decades. He proudly wore the team's shirt during the championship match, waved his hands in support and signaled to the world at large that he truly supported a rainbow nation. Such leadership is precious and rare.

What Mandela offers aspiring strategic leaders is a living example of how complex societal forces, uncompromising values and key moments of decision can be woven together over time, and across political, legal and economic domains, into a compelling vision that can transform a political party, a nation and even the world. Strategic leadership is not just about executing an initial strategy by engendering followership, but above all about adjusting that strategy when necessary to maintain broad support. Few political leaders today master this as well as Nelson Mandela, who is also affectionately known by his tribal name, Madiba.

It seems fitting that a black teenage boy who was enthralled with the machinations around the throne of his tribe's chief, eventually occupied an even larger throne, one visible to the entire world. Mandela is a man who spanned many decades, cultures and realities in his search for freedom and justice. He sacrificed deeply and nobly, and in the process became a world icon for human rights. In political terms, he was truly a transformational leader. In the end, even his foes admire as well as respect him — and justly so. He is one of the most remarkable men of the last 100 years. 

*[Note: Paul J. H. Schoemaker is research director of Wharton's , executive chairman of Decision Strategies International and the author of numerous books and articles. He recently visited South Africa, where he met with government and business leaders to discuss Nelson Mandela's legacy. This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright © . All Rights Reserved

The post Lasting Legacy: Nelson Mandela’s Evolution as a Strategic Leader appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Amid the hand wringing from the outside world over how free and fair Zimbabwe's elections will be, one uncomfortable question lingers. Does it really matter? Yes, 1 million dead voters remain on the voters roll. Yes, Robert Mugabe has banned all but African election observers. And no, the new constitution has not ushered in a new era of press freedom.

The Brussels-based International Crisis Group sums up the concerns. "The voters roll is a shambles, security forces unreformed and the media grossly imbalanced," it said in a report released on Monday. "Conditions for a free and fair vote do not exist."

And yet Zimbabwe's neighbours do not appear to care. South African President Jacob Zuma says Zimbabwe has "done the best so far" considering the short amount of time they had to organize this election. His thoughts echoed that of his ex-wife, the African Union chief, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma who claims she has been assured by Zimbabwe’s Electoral Commission that problems have been rectified and everything is in place.

Realpolitik Trumps Principles

So why does South Africa and the rest of the African Union turn a blind eye to the concerns raised by the outside world? It comes down, according to one observer, to realpolitik.

"I think whether a free and fair election is possible is totally irrelevant at the moment," says Muhamed-Nur Nordien, a political analyst in Johannesburg. "Stakeholders within SADC (Southern Africa Development Community) really just want to see this election happen, and for it to go off as smooth as possible. Trying to contain whatever happens post this election is probably more important from a realpolitik perspective than whether the election really is free and fair."

It is a sad fact of politics that pragmatism trumps principles. The last thing South Africa wants is an unstable Zimbabwe, which could lead to a refugee crisis on its border. It is also reluctant to criticize Mugabe's political party, Zanu-PF. If South Africa points out that a liberation movement can lose its democratic credentials, what does that say about the African National Concress (ANC)?

Western powers also appear to have resigned themselves to an extension of Mugabe's 33-year rule. The European Union lifted most of its sanctions after Zimbabwe's new referendum was approved in March. And US Secretary of State John Kerry offered to “revisit” current sanctions against Zimbabwe if upcoming elections are transparent and peaceful — or at least are seen to be.

So despite the best effort of activists, there's no political will to criticize these elections. Diamonds, it seems, are worth more than democracy.

It matters little whether ordinary Zimbabweans' votes are cast freely or counted fairly. What matters most is that this election does not disturb the status quo, so that everyone can all go on with business as usual. 

*[Note: This article represents the views of the author and not the perspectives of AFP.]

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Zimbabwe: Diamonds Are Worth More Than Democracy appeared first on 51�Թ�.

It was four years ago in the summer of 2009 when Barack Obama made his first trip to Africa as the US president. His stop? Ghana. For many people with little or no knowledge about Ghana, his choice of destination came as a big surprise. Then came the speculations; some hinted that a military base was to be created in Ghana, helping to further expand America’s military presence in Africa and around the world. Others, however, pointed at the increasing economic importance of Ghana on not just the African continent, but the world at large.

Ghana’s economy has been amongst the fastest growing in sub-Saharan Africa, thanks to its rich resources like gold, bauxite, timber and, of course, cocoa. Ghana is also a player in the oil exporting industry, making it a very attractive place for foreign investments — especially since it has a relatively stable democracy. Therefore, for any US president to choose Ghana as their destination, should come as no surprise to anyone with the slightest knowledge about the country’s strategic importance to the US agenda on the African continent.

Yet Obama’s visit was seen by many, including some Ghanaians, as a favor to the country. As one Ghana Embassy official in Washington DC put it: “If you do good, the whole world sees it and Ghana is been recognized by the United States for her good actions.” Such a perspective completely disregards the country’s and the continent’s contribution to the rest of the world from economic prosperity to global security, and rather depicts Ghana and Africa as a mere recipient of US and Western aid.

For many Ghanaians and Africans alike, Obama’s visit was a special moment of pride and jubilation. While some were proud of the fact that one of “their own” could become the leader of the free world, others went a step further to see Obama as the “messiah.” With this came the expectations: the long awaited savior of the free world, who was going to end Bush’s war policies that alienated the US from many parts of the world. Also because of his patrilineal ties to the continent, it was hoped by many that Africa would be on top of Obama’s list, thereby beginning a new journey away from a past defined by an unequal relationship between the West and Africa.

However, as President Obama made it clear to the African people in his address to Ghanaians in the nation’s capital of Accra, that while “the West has often approached Africa as a patron or a source of resources rather than a partner,” it cannot, however, be held “responsible” for the lack of human and capital development on the continent. Africa’s future, he said, “would be shaped by the Africans.” But he also added that while Africa’s destiny would be defined by the African people, the US would  be with them “every step of the way.”

This message captures the overall US foreign policy towards Africa. It was not a political rhetoric, but a sincere message to the people of Africa on what the US, led by Obama, will and will not do.

Challenged Expectations and Disappointment

High expectations, however, have largely been replaced with disenchantment. The war in Afghanistan is ongoing, Guantanamo is still open and the gap between the global north and south remains unabridged, if not worse. These and many other problems facing the African region and the world at large have been traced, whether rightfully so or not, to the president’s actions or lack thereof. And although to those who listened carefully to his message in Accra, it should not have come as a surprise that Obama’s first term made no radical difference to US-Africa relations; his seemingly lack of attention to Africa also disappointed many on the continent.

It therefore comes as no surprise that President Obama’s visit in his second term aroused mixed reactions among the African people. In 2009, the reception was largely of honor and joy as many Ghanaians stormed the streets along the path of his travels in their Obama cloths and T-shirts, celebrating the president’s visit. But on his second trip to the continent, not only was his visit overshadowed by the illness of the continent’s most renowned civil rights champion, Nelson Mandela, but also due to demonstrations by ordinary citizens and labor unions against Obama and US foreign policy. In South Africa, for example, the Congress of South African Trade Unions and its members saw the president’s visit as an opportunity to critique the US on issues ranging from labor discontent, the war in Afghanistan, and freedom of the press. The “No-Bama” coalition might represent a fraction of the larger population in South Africa, but they nonetheless speak for many well informed individuals concerned about such issues.

Africa must take its own agency

It appears that the African people, particularly the youth, are finally heeding his advice of four years ago: that Africa’s future is in the hands of the African people and the West cannot be totally held responsible for its lack of development.

US involvement in any part of the world is solely based on its own interests. Even in those instances when US interests coincide with the interest of the African people, one cannot be lured into thinking that the US is some charitable organization which is there to save the “free world.” The African people and their leaders must come to the realization that the grounds are shifting as they must, and that it is time to get out of the second class mindset into which they have been put for hundreds of years. While President Obama is an honest person with lots of compassion for humanity, and certainly for the people of Africa, he still remains, at least for the next three and half years, the president of a nation whose interests must come before his. Therefore, even though his recent visit to Tanzania, South Africa, and Senegal has the effect of deepening his personal relationship to the region through first-hand experience, Obama’s estimated $100 million visit still remains a business trip.

Africa, today, is home to six of the world’s ten fastest growing economies. South Africa has arguably one of the most diverse economies on the African continent, and its membership to BRICS serve to make it an even stronger player on the global stage. Tanzania and Senegal are both of strategic importance to US economic and security interests, and with countries like Russia, Turkey, Brazil, and especially China making economic inroads into Africa, the need to seriously engage the continent has never been greater.

The former Chinese leader made multiple trips to the continent. Chinese investment in Africa is estimated to be three times that of Washington's. China, as reported by the International Business Times,” became Africa’s largest bilateral trade partner in 2009; the total volume was valued at $198.5 billion in 2012 and is expected to surpass $380 billion by 2015.” Through the China-Africa Development Fund, China is not only solidifying its ties with Africa, but Beijing is also making it clear to the rest of the world that it is there to stay. President Obama’s visit was, therefore, a door opening trip, highlighting the continent’s economic usefulness to US investors, but also making the case to the African people that working with the US would have the potential for a greater impact both economically and politically to the region.

This is a very important moment for Africa and it appears that some, especially the youth, are rising to the occasion by holding not only their own leaders accountable for their actions, but also foreign ones. African leaders must recognize their continent’s importance as a strong contributor to global economic and political development, for Africa can no longer be seen as a taker, but as a giver. The “rush” for Africa should be seen as a very important opportunity to re-negotiate the relationship between Africa and the rest of the world from that of a patron to an equal partner at the trading table. The bigger the competition over Africa, the better for its people.

But in order for the continent to benefit equally from what some commentators have described as the “scramble for Africa,”  its people and especially their leaders must decide on whether they want to be treated as mere spectators to the second coming, or as serious partners and abled negotiators in the global village of the 21^st century.

*[Note: 51�Թ� presents , where we will discuss Obama's recent visit to Africa and what it portends. It will cast a bird's eye view over the legacy of the past, the developments over the last two decades, and the trends that we can extrapolate into the future. For further information, please click .]

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright ©  All Rights Reserved

The post Africa and Obama: Stepping into the Spotlight appeared first on 51�Թ�.

By Jeffrey Herbst and Greg Mills

Nelson Mandela’s leadership has been justly celebrated. He is rightly recognised as one of the great figures of our time. Many will also ask how South Africa will fare without Mandela and if his passing might mark a new stage for the country. That answer is already largely in and it is not particularly attractive.

Mandela left power in 1999, graciously serving only one term and thereby consolidating South Africa’s democracy. Since then, he has largely been out of the spotlight and even before his debilitating illnesses, has not played much of a public role. His chosen successor, Thabo Mbeki, served as president until 2008 when the ruling African National Congress (ANC) decided to recall him and was succeeded by now President Jacob Zuma. Since apartheid formally ended in 1994, about 40% of the population has been born. The post-Mandela era has been upon South Africa for some time.

High Points of Post-Apartheid South Africa

The accomplishments of post-apartheid South Africa should not be understated. The country has managed to maintain political stability and retain the institutions of democracy that were established nearly 20 years ago. Most other African countries had already succumbed to a round of one party or military rule at a similar point in their post-independence history. South Africa has managed to deliver health, electricity, water and education to millions who were previously systematically denied. A burgeoning black African middle class has emerged. Economic growth has been positive and steady (although not spectacular).

South Africa has played an important role in African affairs, including peacekeeping in some difficult spots that the rest of the world has preferred to avoid. But recent years have been less impressive than when Mandela was president, and there are real concerns about the road ahead. Mbeki was a colossal failure in some regards, most notably in refusing to address the Aids pandemic that affects South Africa. His policy failures, despite that South Africa’s medical establishment was probably better equipped to address Aids than almost any on the African continent, led to perhaps 300,000 preventable deaths.

President Zuma seems mainly interested in his own self-aggrandisement. Certainly, the rise in corruption has been palpable. There was considerable corruption during the white regime (especially when sanctions-busting encouraged a climate of breaking the rules generally) but things have got worse. For instance, South Africa was ranked 34th in Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index in 1999, the year Mandela left office. In 2012, the same survey ranked it 69th.

From High Ideals to High Living

The high ideals of the ANC have, it seems, been replaced by high living. It looks increasingly like a legacy party, trading much more on its past accomplishments than its future promise. To date, it has not been challenged decisively both because it has extremely broad support (more a church than a party) and because it did deliver political freedom without paying the cost of a bloody rebellion. That should change.

The Democratic Alliance (DA), the official opposition, has been a voice in the wilderness for years but has come to control the Western Cape Province, in good part because of a good record of service delivery when its leader, Helen Zille, was mayor of Cape Town. Its trajectory from under two percent of the vote in 1994 suggests that its aim to increase this from 17% now to over 30% in the forthcoming 2014 election is not far-fetched. More recently, Mamphela Ramphele, a significant figure in the struggle against apartheid, founded Agang, another political party that has been a scathing critic of Zuma.

Both of those parties have their problems — the DA still has the reputation as a white party while Ramphele is seen as trying to settle old liberation politics scores (she was the mother of Steve Biko’s children, when Biko was seen as a competitor to the ANC). But the day when the ANC will face a real opposition capable of defeating it in a free and fair election is coming. No doubt, the prospect of such a loss will increase corruption within the ANC as it uses all available patronage levers to stay in power.

At the same time, the Zuma government has not been able to adopt reforms that would put a dent in South Africa’s extraordinary unemployment. Nearly 37% of the country’s 50 million people are unemployed, and this figure is twice as high among youths. Until now, the government has reduced poverty and shored up political support through extending welfare. Social grant beneficiaries increased five-fold between 1997 and 2011 to number 16 million, more than twice those paying personal income tax. But while poverty fell dramatically, unemployment doubled and the burden on the taxpaying population increased to unsustainable levels.

Tipping Point?

Not only are there more people on welfare than employed, but in 2013 the government overtook the private sector as the single largest employer — a tipping point if ever there is one. There are real limits to the government’s ability to further redistribute from rich whites to poor, not least since this wage bill is paid for by private sector taxes. And the economy has been burdened by related challenges of low growth, direct investment, and productivity.

On the eve of the transition, it was widely noted that the ANC would have to rework its relationship with the unions because the relatively high wages that the employed in South Africa received would serve as a deterrent to potential investors. That advice was not heeded. South Africa has a wage scale that makes it uncompetitive globally, while keeping many impoverished because no one can afford to hire them.

It would have taken near perfect leadership by Mandela’s successors to solve even some of the extraordinary problems inherited from apartheid. In fact, South Africa’s leaders since 1999 have been poor and represent a sharp decline from the example Mandela set. The issue facing South Africa is no longer racial reconciliation: the white population has either left, made their peace with the new order, or have nowhere to go.

Might fundamentally South Africa create an economy and political system that allows the hopes of the peaceful transition from apartheid to be realised? The answer to date is no. South Africa will need to find a leader not in the heroic mould of Mandela, but someone who is capable of creating a political constituency to overcome the corruption and old politics that is holding the country back from realising the great man’s vision.

*[Note: Jeffrey Herbst is the president of Colgate University and Greg Mills heads the Johannesburg-based Brenthurst Foundation. This article was originally published by the .]

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright © . All Rights Reserved

The post South Africa Beyond Mandela appeared first on 51�Թ�.

By Francis Njubi Nesbitt

"Who is this man Mandela?" The US News & World Report asked in January 1990. Apparently no one knew much, since the magazine could only come up with three short paragraphs about the ANC leader. This sketch of Nelson Mandela's life seemed to be drawn from a Who's Who collection, detailing his early education, legal practice, and arrest by South African authorities in August 1962. Referring to him a as a "living legend," a "martyr," and "saint," the article noted that "Mandela has not been photographed or quoted directly since his final statement from the dock."

Nobody knew what Mandela looked like after 27 years in prison. Yet, the effort by South Africa's apartheid government to ban his image and words backfired as Mandela acquired a near-messianic aura. 

The "Free Mandela Campaign," launched after he was charged with sabotage at the "Rivonia Trial" in 1963, became one of the most visible international human rights movements of the 20th century. The United Nations General Assembly repeatedly called for his unconditional release. Trade unions, political parties, and student groups around the world joined the campaign to free the leaders of the ANC. 

In 1984, both houses of the US Congress adopted a "Mandela freedom resolution." Mayor Eugene Gus Newport of Berkeley, California, proclaimed June 9, 1984, to be "Nelson and Winnie Mandela Day." Detroit's city council adopted a resolution on September 10 of that year calling for the freedom of Nelson and Winnie Mandela. On October 11, anti-apartheid organizations in the US presented the United Nations with petitions for the release of Nelson Mandela signed by over 34,000 people.

The imminent release of what the London Times called "the colossus of African nationalism in South Africa” sent media around the world into a frenzy. "Waiting for Mandela" became the standard headline. In an article titled "Awaiting Mandela," The Economist wrote: "The man jailed a quarter of a century ago on sabotage charges now holds the key to peaceful resolution of his country's racial conflict." Nevertheless, the magazine managed to spend most of the editorial giving credit to apartheid leader Frederik Willem de Klerk for his "reforms." Returning to Mandela at the end, the editor observed: "Prestige apart, this is true: when arrested 25 years ago, Mr. Mandela was merely one of the party's four provincial leaders."

The Voice of Freedom

"Nightline makes history," Ted Koppel declared from Cape Town where he had relocated to cover Mandela's release live. Koppel hosted a "town meeting" before the event, where de Klerk's henchmen were given an opportunity to promote the new, "reasonable" face of apartheid. 

From the beginning, however, it was clear that the US media was out of its depth. The Mandela story did not fit into the neat news routines of the United States. First, the release was delayed by several hours, throwing everybody's deadlines off. Then, organizers allowed members of the South African Communist Party to hang the red flag on the podium and make "radical" speeches. Finally, Mandela's first speech in 27 years began with 15 minutes of salutations to all the dignitaries assembled and freedom fighters past and present who had made that moment possible. 

But it was Mandela's visit to the United States some four months later that most highlighted how much America had yet to learn about the anti-apartheid leader.

Nelson and Winnie Mandela arrived to a tremendous reception at John F. Kennedy International Airport on June 20, 1990. An estimated 750,000 New Yorkers lined Broadway for a "ticker-tape" parade usually reserved for returning war heroes and sports teams. 

Mandela rode through New York in a specially built bulletproof vehicle nicknamed the "Mandelamobile" by New York police. That night, 100,000 people jammed Harlem's Africa Square to hear Mandela speak at the same podium where Malcolm X had called on the South African government to release Mandela, two decades before. New York also honored the ANC leader with a rally of 80,000 at the Yankee Stadium, complete with a rock concert and vendors selling Mandela T-shirts, Mandela flags, and Mandela caps. Introducing Mandela, the equally legendary Harry Belafonte said there had never been a voice more identified with freedom. Rising to the moment, Mandela donned a Yankees cap and broke into an impromptu rendition of the toyi toyi, a South African victory dance. Time editors, astonished at the reception, titled the next issue of the magazine, "A Hero in America."

During his 11 days in the United States, Mandela visited eight cities, made 26 televised speeches, attended 21 meetings and fund-raisers, and addressed five news conferences. 

The interviews sometimes produced dramatic confrontations. In a pointed exchange with Koppel during a nationally televised "town meeting" at City College of New York, Mandela defended his right to meet with leaders of "rogue states" like Fidel Castro, Yasser Arafat, and Muammar Gaddafi. "They support our struggle to the hilt," Mandela told Koppel and proceeded to lecture him on gratitude and self-determination. "Any man who changes his principles according to whom he is dealing," he told Koppel to applause from the audience, "that is not a man who can lead a nation." Koppel was speechless. Breaking a protracted silence, Mandela laughed, asking: "I don't know if I have paralyzed you?" Members of the Jewish Congress at the "town meeting" argued that Mandela's support for the PLO was unacceptable, but quickly added that they appreciated Mandela's statement that he supported Israel's right to exist.

The Castro issue proved less amenable to Mandela's charm. On June 28, the Cuban-American mayors of Miami and surrounding cities refused to meet with Mandela because of his statements about Fidel Castro. The airwaves of Spanish-language radio in Miami were filled with attacks on Mandela for his comments. Outside Miami Beach Convention center, African-American activists faced off with Cuban-Americans during an appearance by Mandela, attended by some 5,000 cheering admirers.

This snub from Miami's Cuban-American community led to a three-year boycott of Miami's tourism industry by African Americans organized by the Boycott Miami: Coalition for Progress, which announced in 1993 that Miami had lost over $50 million in revenues from cancellations by black businesses. The boycott ended in August 1993 after an agreement that called on Miami's business community to commit to black empowerment through providing loans, bonding, insurance, and contracting opportunities. 

In Washington, Mandela's schedule included meetings with the President George H. W. Bush in the White House, and a rare nationally televised address by a foreigner to a joint session of both Houses of Congress. During this address, Mandela called on the United States to maintain sanctions until apartheid had been dismantled. He linked the anti-apartheid struggle to that of American freedom fighters like John Brown, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and Paul Robeson. In Atlanta, he paid tribute to the leaders of the civil rights movement and laid a wreath on the tomb of Martin Luther King Jr. 

"Can't Touch This"

Mandela's final stop in the United States was in Oakland, California, which was widely known as the "cradle of the divestiture movement." Congressman Ron Dellums was ecstatic about the visit. "I was elated when he agreed to come to Oakland to attend a rally in our municipal stadium," he said. "With tens of thousands of community activists filling the ball field and the stands, Mandela was greeted with thunderous cheers. Being able to bring Mandela home to my community and introduce him to my people brought to my mind the words of a popular rap tune 'Can't Touch This.'"

Nowhere had the anti-apartheid movement taken hold like in the San Francisco Bay Area. In the mid-1980s, longshoremen refused to unload South African cargo at Bay Area ports. Cities like Oakland adopted some of the toughest divestment laws in the country. In Berkeley, students boycotted classes, built shanties, occupied buildings, and were arrested in efforts to get the university to divest. In 1986, California Governor George Deukmejian signed legislation proposed by then-Assemblywoman Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) allowing the state's pension fund to divest its $13 billion in assets. Over 100 US companies, including IBM and Coca Cola, followed suit.

American conservatives, meanwhile, maintained a hard line against Mandela and his "maintain sanctions" campaign. President Bush and his aides in the State Department used every opportunity to praise de Klerk. At a press event during Mandela's visit, Bush took time to discuss his warm regard for de Klerk, even though the questioner had not asked about him. The White House had also tried to invite de Klerk for a state visit several times, only to reverse itself because of popular opposition. According to The Washington Post: "Mr. de Klerk can depend on a warm center of support in the White House. While Mr. Mandela has been a hero to the masses, Mr. de Klerk is officialdom's champion."

The Post argued that Bush's regard for de Klerk was based on a "habit" of supporting South African whites. Summing up Bush's position, the newspaper concluded: "Although American officials admire Mr. Mandela, they believe Mr. de Klerk is more important, and his departure from the scene would most upset prospects for peaceful change."

Forbes also joined the bash-Mandela club with an article by Michael Novak titled: "No Hard Questions Please, Nelson Mandela and the US Media." Novak accused reporters of "racism" and "double standards" for supposedly placing Mandela above criticism. "If Mandela were white — if he were Margaret Thatcher, Helmut Kohl, Fidel Castro or even Mikhail Gorbachev — his substantive views would certainly have been subjected to criticism." Novak also claimed that Mandela was merely a pleasant face of a "secretive and extremist organization" that "maintains a close alliance with the Communist Party."   

US News & World Report argued that the visit was "an unalloyed triumph within black America," but added that "much of white America wasn't paying serious attention. A riveting interview with Ted Koppel on ABC, broadcast during prime time, drew a meager 9 percent share of the television audience… Mandela discovered the same lesson as Gorbachev on his last visit: It's hard for any foreign visitor to fire the American imagination these days." 

Free at Last!

South Africa held its first democratic elections in 1994. The election featured the incumbent National Party’s F.W. de Klerk, Mangosuthu Buthelezi of the Inkatha Freedom Party, and Mandela of the African National Congress.

On May 2, 1994, de Klerk conceded defeat, saying Mandela had "walked a long road and now stands at the top of the hill. A traveler would sit down and enjoy the view but a man of destiny knows that beyond this hill lies another and another… As he contemplates the future I hold out my hand in friendship and cooperation." 

Hours later, Mandela claimed victory at a Johannesburg hotel. In a gracious speech, Mandela congratulated de Klerk and the people of South Africa, calling the moment "a joyous night for the human spirit." On May 6, the Independent Electoral Commission announced its final vote tally: 62.6 percent for the ANC, 20.3 for de Klerk's National Party, and 10.5 percent for Inkatha. On May 8, planes approached South Africa from all corners of the earth bearing the largest gathering of black heads of state ever. Three of these planes carried the 44-member official US delegation led by Vice President Al Gore and his wife Tipper, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and a congressional delegation. The overwhelmingly black delegation marked an historic stage for African-American participation in US foreign policy.

Vice President Al Gore emphasized the African-American connection in official remarks generally ignored by the mainstream US press. "The transition here and the civil rights movement in the United States have been closely intertwined longer than many realize," he said. "The lessons of the spirit which came out of America's civil rights movement have been vigorously exported to South Africa and have, in turn, been taken to the United States."

The ceremony was followed by an African and African-American healing ceremony at Johannesburg's integrated Marker Theatre, where poet Maya Angelo and South African artists raised up the names of the ancestors who had made the moment possible. Al Gore raised up the names of Du Bois and the African Methodist Episcopal Church and other African American activists, who had participated in the struggle. "To the United States, this transformation has special significance. After all, for years, Americans agonized over the horrors of our own apartheid. And the struggle for justice in South Africa and in the United States has in many ways been one struggle."

*[Note: Francis Njubi Nesbitt is a professor of Africana Studies at San Diego State University. He is the author of Race for Sanctions and has published numerous book chapters and articles in academic journals. This article was originally published by ].

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright © . All Rights Reserved

The post When America Met Mandela appeared first on 51�Թ�.

On the of his presidency, Barack Obama is set to begin his week-long visit to sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) on , which will see the US president travel to Senegal, South Africa, and Tanzania from June 26 to July 3.

However, why is Obama visiting Africa and why now? Prior to the scheduled trip, Obama met with Xi Jinping, the president of China, on June 7-8 at a summit in southern California. It seems the ��were correct when they stated: “President Obama is planning major diplomatic initiatives with China and Africa.”

International relations are always about strategic interests. Why did Obama meet up with Xi Jinping in June 2013? Among other reasons, it might have something to do with China’s growing importance economically on the world-stage — not to mention the fact that China holds the greatest percentage of US debt.

How about Africa? What is Washington’s strategic interest in Africa? That is the golden question. If African leaders understood the answer to this question, they would begin to think differently, lead responsibly, and take advantage of the worldwide shifts occurring to the benefit of their own citizens. Africa has an opportunity, if it manages the competing interests in its political economy well enough, to lift millions out of systemic poverty while providing them with better standards of living.

What is Special About Sub-Saharan Africa?

Officially, the press statement from the White House states the trip “” To decode this statement, one must cast their minds back to comments made by Secretary of State John Kerry when, as yet, the public was unaware of this Africa trip. These statements were captured in a and in the .��In response to questions by Rep. Karen Bass��(D-Calif), Kerry said:

“Africa we need to be deeply engaged in and intend to be. And the president will travel there. We have a lot to do.��Six of the 10 or 12 fastest growing countries in the world are in Africa. We all are concerned about our economic future. China is investing more in Africa than we are and it doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game. We have to recognize where our future economic interests and capacity may lie.”

Obama’s trip is about safeguarding America’s economic interests — bearing in mind where Washington’s future capacity may lie. This is what the press statement loosely framed as “to discuss our strategic partnerships on bilateral and global issues…[while] broadening and deepening cooperation between the United States and the people of sub-Saharan Africa.” Africa is the new economic frontier and the US does not want to be left out while China capitalizes on its African partnerships.

Kerry alluded to the fact that some of the fastest growing economies are found in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This is correct, according to the 2013��,��as well as its predecessor from the previous year. African economies have maintained a consistent solid expansion for over a decade, right through what is termed the global economic downturn. The International Monetary Fund’s ��forecasted similar growth trends for SSA as the World Bank did. Seven SSA countries outgrew China last year, and ten out-performed India. This is history in the making and Africa could miss this opportunity if it is not awake and focused on what is transpiring on the table of nations. Africa desperately needs to harness its strengths and exploit the opportunities now available, in such a way that it generates better human development dividends for its masses who are projected to double in a mere 37 years, according to the United Nations Statistics Division.

What is the Source of this Growth?

To��adequately��understand the��principal sources of growth in SSA, one can consult the ��—��launched by the Africa Progress Panel, chaired by Kofi Annan on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum on Africa. The report states: “On one estimate, extractive industries have accounted for around one-third of regional GDP growth over the past decade – more than transport, telecommunications and manufacturing combined.” It further clarifies that the 20 countries the IMF identified — in their ��—��as resource intensive in SSA account for about 56 percent of the region’s population and around 80 percent of its GDP. The good thing is that the SSA growth phenomenon is not limited to resource intensive countries. It extends to much of the region.

Naturally, China is a big part of the increased economic activity on the continent. It makes absolute sense then that the Obama administration will allocate its single longest journey during the summer season to go politik in Africa.

A Great Opportunity for Africa: Sagacity Required

I have often heard the following statement: “…but Senegal, South Africa, and Tanzania are not necessarily the economic giants in Africa.” My retort is that while this may be true, Obama is not going to spend the longest trip of his presidency with just these three governments and their private sector actors alone. They are mainly a base from which he can reach out to strategic partners he hopes to��connect with.

Whatever the case, it is high time Africa realizes the worldwide shifts taking place and the unique opportunities they present. African leaders, civil society, and the many youths that make up most of SSA’s population, must “wise-up” and “shine their eyes” — to use a colloquial Nigerian expression. A better future could be within reach in less than one generation if SSA leaders continue to improve state capacity, promote good governance, transparency, accountability, and long-ranged public policies aimed at promoting industrialization, alleviating poverty, creating jobs, eliminating illiteracy, and so on. All of this and more are elucidated in the 2013 Africa Progress Report, which champions equity in extractives. At the end of the day, if wealth generated from solid expansion is not equitably redistributed to the benefit of all, development will remain at best but a mirage; and that would be a huge travesty which future generations would hold the present generation accountable for.

I end this piece with the words of Secretary Kerry to Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.). Do ponder over them:

“We have to recognize where our future economic interests and capacity may lie.”��

Allow me to elaborate. Relations between states, otherwise known as international relations, are all about interests. As the US considers its interests and rightly so, African leaders should also consider the interests of their people and negotiate on a peer to peer basis.

*[Note: The graph in this article is part of the , and has been used with permission from the report’s producers. A version of this article was originally published by the.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Image: Copyright��© . All Rights Reserved

The post Obama’s Visit to Africa: Why Now? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Bernedette Muthien, Executive Director of the South African NGO , speaks to Annika Schall��about gender based violence, its root causes and possible solutions.

Question 1:��What are the most common forms of gender based violence in South Africa and what are its root causes?

When we talk about forms of abuse it ranges from battery to family murders where men kill the women and all the children – everyone in the entire house is murdered.�� South Africa has high rates of rape as well. For example women who are perceived as a threat to the system get raped. So if you are a single woman who refuses to marry or to have children you expose yourself to gender based violence and rape. If you are a lesbian especially a masculine looking lesbian, or if you are a gay man who looks more feminine, you will expose yourself to rape. Anything that is not gender conforming will be susceptible to rape. Men get raped opportunistically as well.

So when we discuss forms let’s just try to understand how the violence works: Gender based violence obviously occurs based on gender and the root cause of all violence we would argue is patriarchy. It precedes all the economic systems we know today: it precedes capitalism, socialism, etc. And patriarchy has been around for thousands of years depending on the history of colonization of the region. In some regions of the world patriarchy has been around for 5000 years; in others more like 2000 years. What patriarchy does is it uses violence in general to control people and gender based violence specifically to control people. This can be seen by looking at child rape and child sexual abuse. When a child is raped, then that person is marked by that rape for the rest of their lives. Sometimes they themselves become perpetrators.�� In other words, if you rape a child, you have that person incapacitated for almost the rest of their lives. It can become an incredibly powerful source of control,�� and then you have an automatic cyclic existence of rape: generation after generation gets raped. I become a parent, I rape my child – it perpetuates itself and the mechanisms of control become almost unconscious. It is a system to maintain control over people, and women in particular.

Question 2: When it comes to gender based violence and sexual violence in particular, statistics indicate a high level of these crimes in South Africa. Why do you think that is?

As I’ve said, the root cause of all violence and all gender based violence in the world, and in South Africa as well, is patriarchy. ��This violence, borne out of patriarchy, exists all over the world. In 2005 two main organizations did multi-country studies to show the extent of violence against women: one was the World Health Organization, and the other one was Amnesty International. ��Results showed that violence against women is endemic. Women are not safe in any part of the world, whether it be Bloemfontein, Bombay or Berlin. So that is compounded by various other things like economics, what social class you come from, in what region you live, all kind of things; sexual orientation, sexual preferences etc. ��All these parameters reflect and compound your vulnerability to various forms of sexual violence. When it comes to South Africa it may seem that there is a much higher rate of violence against women and violence in general than in the rest of the world. But because there are no reliable statistics that one can compare with the world over, we cannot accurately say whether this is true or not . What we can say is that we track records very well here. Our Medical Research Council is run quite well. Several years ago their research showed a femicide rate where a female is murdered by�� a male partner every 6 hours. So we can say that South Africa gathers our statistics well, so we do have better records than other places. But another fact about South Africa is that we are a post-conflict society. For 300 years we had colonialism and slavery, then we had about 50 years of Apartheid and both of these were extremely brutal periods and the impact it had on the indigenous people was horrific. So we live in a society that is still suffering from these centuries of conflict and violence. It is no surprise that violence can still be found in the society to such a very large extent. It is compounded by economic issues – we have a lot of people living in poverty. Many people are of the opinion that the population is poorer now under democracy than it was under Apartheid, and the state fails in its welfare services. People are dying waiting in line for public health care. So given all these things, and the fact that we have a culture now where people think that like in a soap opera they can make a lot of money in a nanosecond by doing armed robbery for example. An attitude that screams – easy money. A philosophy of live fast, die young. ��These are some of the issues that we face, now I cannot say that South Africa is a particularly evil country, but I can say that we document extremely well.

Question 3: A lot of these records might be misleading because many offences are not even reported to the police. Why do victims decide not to report?

For a number of different reasons. When we have a situation where the police or the criminal justice system is not responsive, people are going to be reluctant to report. When you call the police and you say “my husband or my boyfriend is beating me! Come and rescue me!” and they say “No, it’s a private matter, we cannot intervene” then you are not going to bother calling them next time. Sometimes the police brutalize the caller. There are instances in South Africa and elsewhere where a woman who got raped and then sought help from the police was raped by the policemen again. So there are lots and lots of reasons why reporting might be problematic or might be low.

The kind of legislation that we have in South Africa like the Domestic Violence Act of 1999 (DVA) is very progressive but at the same time our judicial system, especially the police, are not often not aware of the DVA’s provisions. They do not know that they are by law compelled to follow a system that tells them exactly what to do and how to behave, and how to help complainants. They cannot tell me it is a ‘private matter ‘and I must sort it out with my husband.

Question 4: Since the end of Apartheid how has the South African government dealt with the problem?

*It is a complex question with no easy answers. We live in majority patriarchal, male-dominated societies which, by implication, are populated with male-dominated institutions. This holds true even for societies with some of the world’s highest representation of women in government, such as Rwanda and South Africa. Which raises the critical issue of quantity over quality. Not all women in these patriarchal institutions will necessarily have the interests of women or gender at heart. Indeed, often these female public representatives owe their positions entirely to patriarchy, and in effect will tend to support, rather than dismantle, patriarchy. Hence the challenges of political will to ensure implementation of South Africa’s inspiring gender legislation and policies, to concretely combat and eradicate gender-based violence, and ensure gender equality and justice. Further, funding for NGOs focused on women’s or gender issues, including combating gender violence, has dissipated since approximately 2008, in part due to the global economic crisis. Many women’s NGOs have regrettably been forced to close due to this lack of funding, while many others are struggling without sufficient funding. Society also is often more conservative than the progressive legislation and policies, which further exacerbates challenges of effecting concrete, lasting societal transformation. Despite all these tribulations, interspersed with some success stories, we simply cannot stop our work, with or without funding, and irrespective of political will in any given historical moment. The simple imperatives of justice demand our continued vigilance, our continued activisms, toward a society in which we are all free of violence and free to realize our full human potentials.

Question 5: What needs to be done to make sexual violence a less prevalent topic in South Africa and what would you wish for in the future?

We need to do many different things and no solution is easy or simple. We need resources and we need political will. We need to go from door to door, speak to women and men and children. We need to work with people’s mindsets in the same ways we worked against Apartheid very effectively. We need to show how an archaic patriarchal outlook harms women and men and how we can make a better world for everybody. We absolutely do need ways for people and communities to survive economically. Not in the sense of becoming a lawyer, a doctor or a laborer, but employment in the sense of where people are engaged in constructive work in a community, where they are engaged in what we call in Africa ubuntu, which is about a sense of community, a sense of belonging, looking after one another. We really need to reclaim this ubuntu to show that we are dependent, and can rely, on one another.

I would like to continue to have hope. We must try and find hope for what we do and it would be good if we could continue to do the work we do – To find more and more people using cooperation rather than competition, and if more and more men come along and say“We have to construct better models of masculinity, better ways to relate to one another”;�� more and more women saying, “I do not want to be a victim. I want to take my own agency and power but I don’t want to be like Margaret Thatcher either. I want to be a woman who is not patriarchal.” and women coming together, working with one another, that could be very wonderful. A world beyond the shackles of patriarchy.

*[Update: Following a request by the interviewee, the answer to question 4 was amended on February 1, 2017.]

The views expressed in this interview are the interviewee’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Gender-Based Violence in South Africa: Interview with Bernedette Muthien appeared first on 51�Թ�.