Sunday, 7 September 2008

South Africa : Energy Politics

South Africa: Chavez Oils Way Into Country, Sarkozy Splits Atoms


Business Day (Johannesburg)

Email This Page

Print This Page

Comment on this article

Johannesburg

THE government's preoccupation with security of supply, in electricity and energy, was always going to trigger the interest of energy rich countries.

This year alone SA has played host to two leading statesmen - French President Nicolas Sarkozy in March and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez this week.

Their visits, although months apart, were almost an identical execution of the single-minded pursuit of foreign policy. That Sarkozy's visit came soon after the government published its nuclear energy policy and strategy document, and -- even more importantly -- as Eskom was looking for bidders for its multi billion-rand nuclear programme was hardly a coincidence.

Sarkozy put on the agenda what French nuclear company Areva can do as a major player in nuclear energy. Areva CEO , Anne Lauvergeon, who was part of the French delegation could have stayed at home.

Sarkozy was capable of punting the group eloquently. Engaged in a neck- and-neck race with rival US group Westinghouse, Areva could do with a little Sarkozy magic.

Enter Chavez. He came to charm SA this week . And boy he made all the right noises. But, while impressing his hosts, he was not going to take his eyes off the ball -- to be SA's "best energy friend forever".

Given our economy's overreliance on energy, SA can do with oil-rich friends.

In SA Chavez has found a government eager to set up its national oil company, PetroSA, on the world stage. PetroSA has the ask of ensuring that we do not run out of fuel.

Hence the mooted multi-billion-rand crude oil refinery at Coega. And the Venezuelans have a foot in the door. Discussions between PetroSA and its Venezuelan counterpart PDVSA include the Venezuelans investing in the refinery.

President Umaru Yar'Adua Also becomes ill

Nigeria: 17 Days of Waiting for Mr President


Vanguard (Lagos)

Email This Page

Print This Page

Comment on this article

Ben Agande

WHAT started as rumour became a serious matter ten days after President Umaru Yar'Adua left Nigeria for Saudi Arabia in what official explanation said was a trip to perform the lesser Hajj, an obligation performed by Muslims but less known than the annual Hajj which every Muslim who has the capacity is expected to perform at least once in a life time.

After announcing the retirement of the top echelon of the military, the special adviser to the president on communications, Segun Adeniyi, had said the President was proceeding on to Mecca to perform Umrah.

Although he did not include the day Yar'Adua was expected to return, many observers in the President Villa believed that the President would be back in a matter of days since a scheduled trip to Brazil was just days away. But as people say, man proposes, God disposes. The trip to Brazil was cancelled and the exact date of Yar'Adua's return has since been a subject of speculation.

If the President had retired from politics after serving for eight years as the governor of Katsina State and gone back to teaching analytical chemistry at the Ahmadu Bello University Zaria as was being speculated before he was drafted into the presidential race by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, the brouhaha that his continued stay in Saudi Arabia has generated would have been confined to his immediate environment and family. But from the moment he threw his hat into the ring, Yar'Adua has, like no other President in the history of Nigeria, had to have his medical record closely examined to the minutest details.

At the heat of his nationwide campaign to become the president, Yar'Adua had to break his campaign trail to dash off to Germany, where, as subsequent events proved, he had been a regular visitor to attend to his medical needs.

But for a man whom many agree is deeply reserved and emotionally reticent, the responsibility of making known to the Nigerian public the reason for his visit to Germany fell on the leadership of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, which many people believe poorly handled the information about his departure.

Three days into his trip, rumours about the deterioration in his health heightened so much so that it took a dramatic telephone call from Obasanjo which was televised and routed through a loud speaker for the anxiety of millions of Nigerians to be doused. Even after assuming office and severally assuring Nigerians that his health conditions were exaggerated, Yar'Adua has continually found himself in the public glare with questions being raised perpetually about his state of health.

Unfortunately, his ingrained reticence has tended to obscure rather than reveal his true strength.But, how did we get to this state where the nation was almost at a stand still with rumour making the rounds that the President's health has so much degenerated such that he was alleged to be on life support machine in a Saudi Hospital where, ab initio, he was said to have gone to, not on medical grounds but to perform a religious obligation? When news of Yar'Adua's indisposition in Saudi Arabia was first mooted by Saharareporters, the New York-based Nigerian website, the issue was only disclosed in hushed tones.

But when the same website reported and was later confirmed by officials of the Brazilian government that the planned state visit had been cancelled ("readjusted" in the words of the foreign affairs minister, Ojo Maduekwe), what was initially thought to be in the realm of speculative journalism" was gradually assuming the toga of truth. And, indeed, the issue could no longer be kept secret.

In deed, the concern by many Nigerians over the health of the President is borne out of two considerations; for many Nigerians, it is borne of a genuine concern that a President who struck a good cord with many Nigerians because of his perceived sterling qualities was being unnecessarily bogged down by sickness, while to the feeble political opposition, the "perennial" sickness of the President was a confirmation of their long held view that he ought not to have been there in the first place.

But, as if to compound the already complex issues surrounding Yar'Adua's health, there is scant information from official quarters on the true state of things. While the Minister of Information and communications, John Odey, and Maduekwe insisted that the president's long stay at the holy land and the cancellation of his planned trip to Brazil were nothing unorthodox, there were daily information which tend to create the impression that those saddled with the responsibility of managing the information of the President are either truly ignorant of the true position or are being economical with the truth. It would appear that the former appears to be more appropriate.

Relevant Links

While there is a loud silence on the true state of the president's health and indeed whether he is in hospital, the rumour mill has found a fertile ground to thrive. In fact, the last week, rumour about the death of Yar'Adua was so strong that the Minister of Information had to issue a two- paragraph statement reaffirming that the President was "hale and hearty". As it was during his campaign to be elected as president, rumour about death is again a constant thing about our President. Unfortunately, there appears to be nobody in the mould of Obasanjo to call Yar'Adua on speaker phone to assure Nigerians that he is not dead.

Despite the assurances from Odey that the President is well, there is no let to the anxiety and rumour about his health in the land. The local media have been trying to outdo each other on who would bring out the biggest 'scoop'. While some reported that the President had had a kidney transplant and was on a life support machine, others said the operation had not been done as a matching kidney has not found. The confusion in the coverage of Yar'Adua's health underscores the confusion in the land about the true position of the President's health.

The question being asked is,since Yar'Adua has consistently admitted that he is a human being and can be sick, why has his recent trip to Saudi Arabia, ostensibly to seek medical help, been so shrouded in secrecy?

According to impeccable sources in the Villa, with the exception of the Vice President and some Presidency key officers, many officials in government are equally unaware of the true position of things which informs the apparent confusion in the land. Nothing demonstrates this truism than the vague explanation from key government officials that the President will come back as soon as possible."

And to demonstrate that all is well with Yar'Adua, news was passed around that having performed his lesser hajj, the President was due to come back to the country, Tuesday last week, to chair the weekly Federal Executive Council meeting for the first time in three weeks the following Wednesday.

Though there was high expectation in the larger society about Yar'Adua's return plan, there was no sign in the Presidential Villa that such return was imminent. The usual activities associated with presidential movement was non-existent and there was deliberate silence by key officials to say exactly whether the President would come back on Tuesday as reported or not. Not surprising, Wednesday came and went and the President was nowhere around the council chambers.

While Yar'Adua is away,activities in the Presidential Villa appears to have come to a standstill in the over fifteen days that he has been out. Instead, the rumour mill is waxing stronger and the media especially the web based news services are striving to outdo one another on who has the most "authentic" update on the president's health. But the question that has kept agitating the minds of many Nigerians is why would the president's men deliberately keep Nigerians out of the true position of Yar'Adua's health when the President, on several occasions, has openly admitted that his health is not in the best of state and as a human being there is nothing extraordinary about it?

Relevant Links

The implication of the events of the last two weeks has done incalculable damage to the perception of Nigerians about their Presidency. The implication is that everything that emanates from such a government no matter how well intentioned might be taken with a pinch of salt. For a government that came in with so much goodwill, this is not the best way to be perceived. .

Zimbabwe: Hidden Hand Behind MDC-T's Intransigence














Harare

"The Bush administration said yesterday it no longer considers President Mugabe to be the legitimate leader of Zimbabwe and called upon the 'body politic' of his country 'to go forward and correct that situation'.

"We are continuing to work on what are some of the strategies that we can use to isolate Mugabe in the sense that he has to realise that the political status quo is not acceptable." He said the US and some European countries are working with the civil society in Zimbabwe, including human rights groups and private media journalists. -- The Washington Times, citing US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Walter Kansteiner, August 21 2002).

WE begin with the passage from The Washington Times of August 21 2002 in order to put into context the direct link between US-UK interference in Zimbabwe's internal affairs and the continuing demand for illegal transfer of power by MDC-T as well as Morgan Tsvangirai's refusal to accept the mandate of "inclusive governance" which voters created through the March 29 harmonised elections and the subsequent presidential run-off election of June 27 2008.

In other words, there is a direct link between the external manoeuvres of the regime change forces led by the US and UK and the internal manoeuvres of the internal proxies of those same in the form of MDC-T and its NGO cohorts here in Zimbabwe. The demand for the illegal transfer of power comes from exactly the same voters. But the same voters hold the key to solving the same problems.

First let us examine the external manoeuvres by the US, the UK and the allies. Having failed to stage the coup d'etat which the US State Department called for on August 20 2002, the US, the UK and the EU in June 2008 sought to subvert Zimbabwe's constitutional and electoral process in order to achieve the same objective stated by the State Department on August 20 2002: The overthrow of the elected Government and the unilateral cancellation of the people's vote.

How exactly did these powers try to achieve this objective?

l First, the US State Department again rejected the sovereign mandate of Zimbabwe's voters in the 2005 parliamentary elections which all the participating observers declared free and fair.

l Second, Bernard Kouchner for the European Union presidency; Gordon Brown for the British Labour government; and Condoleezza Rice and Jendayi Fraser for the US government -- all stated in June 2008 that the only government of Zimbabwe they were willing to recognise was one led by Tsvangirai.

l Third, the same leaders sought to force Zimbabwe to cancel the presidential run-off, even though it was required by our Constitution. They wanted to force the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission and the voters to revert to the indecisive election results that gave the opposition a slight edge over the liberation movement, Zanu-PF.

l Fourth, when 80 percent of the presidential run-off vote went to President Mugabe, the same white powers denounced the result and demanded the installation of Tsvangirai of the MDC as President of Zimbabwe.

l Fifth, they successfully recruited at least three leaders in Sadc to agitate for the position of the UK, US and EU -- that is to urge Sadc and the AU not to recognise President Robert Mugabe as the legitimately elected head of state of Zimbabwe. It took the firm resolutions of AU and Sadc summits to silence those three heads of state.

l Sixth, and finally, the UK and US manipulated the G8 and the UN Security Council to invoke Chapter Seven of the UN Charter against Zimbabwe in order to obtain UN permission for a military invasion of Zimbabwe which the US and the UK had been contemplating since the days of their Iraq invasion in 2003.

These political and diplomatic manoeuvres by the US, the UK and the EU were packaged as aimed only at removing one man, President Robert Mugabe, in the very same way that the vicious and illegal economic sanctions against all the people of Zimbabwe have also been misrepresented as targeted against the same President and his so called "cronies".

Yet a close analysis of all the manoeuvres by the white powers shows that their aim is to cancel the will of the people and the emphatic results of the people's vote. This was the aim of Walter Kansteiner's declaration on August 20 2002 as much as it was the aim of all the pronouncements by Gordon Brown, Bernard Kouchner, Condoleezza Rice and Jendayi Fraser in June 2008. What these white racist powers have been saying since 2001 is that the aspirations and votes of the people Zimbabwe do not count. What counts are the interests of white Britain, Europe, North America and the proxy groups they have chosen to sponsor within Zimbabwe.

But Sadc, through the mediation efforts of President Thabo Mbeki, has recognised both the aspirations and the votes of the people of Zimbabwe as the only bases for legitimate governance.

Relevant Links

The people of Zimbabwe aspire to fully reclaim and use their once stolen land. The people of Zimbabwe aspire to secure and exploit the natural assets and human resources of their country. The people of Zimbabwe aspire to choose their trade and development partners in the world. And the people of Zimbabwe elected a multi-party Senate and House of Assembly to pursue and implement these aspirations and objectives through mechanisms of "inclusive governance" to be led by President Robert Mugabe and to be based on the results of the presidential run-off on June 27 2008. That is democracy at work.

Sadc has conveyed these aims and aspirations of the people to the AU and to the Non-Aligned Movement who have also endorsed them. Together, Sadc, AU and NAM have also succeeded in getting China, Russia, Vietnam and Libya to block the Anglo-Saxon attacks on Zimbabwe at the UN Security Council.

So far it would seem as if the Euro-American onslaught from Walter Kansteiner in 2002 to Bernard Kouchner in 2008 has been fully rebuffed by Sadc, AU, NAM and those members of the UN Security Council who are friendly to Zimbabwe. However, there is need for an internal spear to complement the external diplomatic shield against foreign intrusion.

The majority of the people of Zimbabwe, the true and intended victims of sanctions and destabilisation, hold the internal spear against the internal proxies of the external powers. Since the end of the presidential run-off election President Robert Mugabe and President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa have been pleading with those who may have become proxies of the external powers against Zimbabwe without knowing the tragic implications of such collaboration. The two leaders have been advising all those who became prodigal sons or prodigal daughters, without much though, to come back home and affirm the unity of Zimbabwe and the wish of the overwhelming majority for inclusive governance, national unity and an immediate end to sanctions.

It is now September, a long way from June 2008, and it looks as if MDC-T has definitely not listened to the appeals of the two leaders. The following evidence leads to this conclusion and our readers must judge for themselves each of the following examples.

The unelected military leader of Botswana, Ian Khama, is one of the three Sadc leaders once recruited to divide Sadc over Zimbabwe and to help the UK and US governments to destabilise the country. Yet it is that same leader and that same country which MDC-T and its leader are now using as a financial, diplomatic and propaganda rear-base from which to divide and destabilise Zimbabwe on behalf of the British and the North Americans.

The external infiltration of Zimbabwe through Botswana is so rife that even the EU and US shooting list of Zimbabwean patriots is being circulated and implemented by the Khama regime and the Botswana Diocese of the Anglican Church of the Province of Central Africa. One Reverend Archford Musodza frequently communicates with the regime change elements inside Zimbabwe.

In the run-up to the June 27 presidential run-off election Musodza wrote a letter to one Christine in which he assumed that MDC-T was going to bury Zanu-PF and President Robert Mugabe on June 27. He wrote the following astounding things, among many others:

"Once the old man, Mugabe is ousted, either by the ballot box or by the MDC-T's other plan as discussed over the phone, that will also be the end of (Bishop Nolbert Kunonga). Once MDC-T's Tsvangirai takes the reins, then all former white farmers are assured of a return to their farms. The church will be restored and we can mobilise all Anglicans to now vote for a Bishop of Zimbabwe from Britain who is not polluted.

"The British bishop will be mandated to return the Zimbabwean Church back (sic) to correct hands, the English Church with proper British ethos."

It is only MDC- T president Morgan Tsvangirai who is mentioned by name in the letter to Christine as deserving imperialist support in Zimbabwe. Several other persons (including one MDC-T Member of Parliament who is a prominent lawyer) are also mentioned. Former Selous Scouts agents remaining in Zimbabwe are also mentioned as among the forces, which will help Morgan Tsvangirai, consolidate power.

Some readers could argue that the Musodza letter to Christine is fake. This would make sense if we were relying on just that leaked letter to reach our conclusions.

But there are other indicators. Apart from the anti-Sadc Zimbabwe postures and activities of the Botswana English Church and the military regime of Ian Khama, there has been Morgan Tsvangirai's prolonged stay in Botswana after the March 29 harmonised elections as well as his campaign to reverse the result of the June 27 poll from Botswana.

Most recently there are disturbing allegations that at least seven MDC Mutambara MPs-elect were lured to Botswana just before their swearing-in and lured with foreign currency in order to make them vote with MDC-T.

The same media reports also reports also allege that the same seven MPs, after their swearing-in and on the eve of the opening of the Seventh Parliament of Zimbabwe, decided to abandon the accommodation officially booked for them by Parliament officials.

They joined MDC-T MPs at the Meikles Hotel where they continued to consult on ways to achieve regime change, contrary to the idea of an all-inclusive government led by President Mugabe.


Then during President Robert Mugabe's official speech opening that Seventh Parliament of Zimbabwe, about 20 or more opposition MPs disrupted Parliament on camera. It is alleged by legal experts that disruption of Parliament was clearly in violation of Section 21(schedule) of the Privileges, Immunities and Powers of Parliament Act, Chapter 2:08.

The fact that neither the opposition nor individual members have apologised for what happened at the opening of the Seventh Parliament is consistent with role of the opposition required by the UK, the US and the EU, but totally inconsistent with the expectations and aspirations of the majority of the people of Zimbabwe who want an inclusive government focused on reversing the damage caused by unilateral and illegal sanctions invited by the same opposition in 2000-2001.

It is therefore important at this stage in the history of the Anglo-Saxon onslaught on Zimbabwe for the media to alert the majority of the people of Zimbabwe to the dangers which the opposition continues to pose for this country.

l First, from its beginning in 1999, the opposition and its "civil society" NGOs have allowed the Anglo-Saxon powers to parade the same opposition as part and parcel of the illegal regime change apparatus and as an internal proxy of the white West. When the leader of the Mutambara faction of this opposition recently allowed a belated interview to tell the same white powers to leave Zimbabweans to solve their own problems, that was exactly when seven MPs from that faction allegedly deserted the faction and rejoined the intransigent MDC-T.

l Since late 2007, Zanu-PF and the Government of Zimbabwe have been urging the opposition to join them in denouncing and resisting the illegal, unilateral and racist sanctions invited upon the country by the same opposition back in 2000. The opposition continues to refuse to join Zanu-PF and the Government in this urgent effort.

Instead, a large number of officials and supporters of that opposition continued to lie about the reality of economic sanctions, choosing to define them as just travel bans. Morgan Tsvangirai, Learnmore Jongwe, Nelson Chamisa, Obert Gutu, Douglas Mwonzora, Rashweat Mukundu and scores of others have misled the people into believing that the sanctions were just travel bans meant to keep President Mugabe and a few of his "cronies" from travelling. The unashamed denials were made on television, although other footage already existed on ZTV and BBC, in which Morgan Tsvangirai and Fidelis Mhashu had openly begged the world, and especially South Africa, to cut off the flow of petrol, diesel, electricity, finance, trade and everything else of consequence going to or coming out of Zimbabwe.

It was only after the British Labour government, the US Republican administration, and the EU began to target and threaten specific multinational companies over Zimbabwe in July and August 2008 that Tapiwa Mashakada of MDC-T finally admitted on ZTV that the sanctions were real economic measures targeting the whole economy and the people and not just travel bans on a few individuals. Yet, even after that, the opposition has remained silent on the issue of sanctions here, while its supporters abroad openly celebrate the effects of those same sanctions on the entire population of Zimbabwe.

l In late 2002, NGOs supporting the MDC showed their support for Anglo-Saxon efforts to divide and destroy Zimbabwean society. They published a big document called "Is Zimbabwe on the Brink of Genocide?" They proceeded to answer their own question, indicating which alleged "tribe" was going to set up and massacre which other "tribe" using what issues and what means.

The MDC formations for their part helped the efforts of their NGO supporters by claiming that genocide was indeed an ongoing process in Zimbabwe, targeted against the opposition. How the MDC formations could be defined as a tribe or race subject to genocide remains beyond comprehension.

l During the opening of the Seventh Parliament, those members of the opposition disrupting the proceedings clearly shouted that President Robert Mugabe and Government had no right to honour Kirsty Coventry as a sports heroine of national and international stature who won gold and silver medals for Zimbabwe at the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. It was in this part of their disruption of Parliament that the 20 or more MPs displayed the binary logic which the MDC-T has adopted from the rightwing who sponsored and founded the party.

The MPs shouted that, because Kirsty Coventry was of Caucasian ancestry, she could not and should not be hailed on behalf of the people by President Robert Mugabe and his Government. They went further to say that Kirsty Coventry belonged to them, to the opposition by virtue of her being of Caucasian ancestry.

This display of racist dualism has been an integral part of opposition thinking in Zimbabwe especially since 1999.

As a project sponsored by Anglo-Saxon powers, the MDC has adopted as one of its responsibilities the duty to erase the history of the African liberation movement by equating it with that of Nazism, fascism, apartheid and even UDI. The techniques used include what Naomi Klein calls recasting and conflating or conflation.


In recasting, the African land reclamation movement which seeks to enable the dispossessed African majority to reclaim their land which was once stolen by white settlers is presented as reverse racism which leaves no room for whites who are reconciled to Zimbabwe. But, in fact, this movement merely requires all Zimbabwean citizens of all racial origins to accept that the State now controls land on behalf of all.

The people and that all those who have reconciled themselves with the new Zimbabwe are entitled to queue for land on an equal basis and they shall be resettled. The sponsors of the MDC formations want the opposition to portray the land reclamation movement a racist war by Africans and against all the people of Caucasian descent.

This recasting erases the fact that Guy Clutton-Brock, a Caucasian Briton from Wales, was among the first Zimbabwean heroes to be buried at the National Heroes Acre. This recasting erases the fact that former East Germany, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and former Soviet republics, together with China, were among the most faithful supporters of the African liberation movements of Southern Africa. This recasting seeks to erase the historical fact that it was President Mugabe who as Prime Minister in 1980 invited all Zimbabweans of all races to join the liberation movement in a process of national healing and reconciliation.

From the recasting, it becomes easy for the MDC formations and their white sponsors to conflate the interests of the few unreconstructed Rhodesians and Britons who rejected the hand of African reconciliation as if they are the universal interest of every Caucasian person who has ever lived on this planet. For it is only the few unreconstructed and defiant former Rhodesians and Britons who have so lost is because, by refusing to be resettled, they have refused to share that land with the dispossessed Africans.

The MDC formations are on the record claiming that the Daily News which used to be published by the Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe, was meant to be their mouthpiece.

It is from that mouthpiece that we find the roots of binary linking (in the MDC formations) which claims that President Mugabe, Zanu-PF and the Government of Zimbabwe cannot and should not honour a national star of Caucasian ancestry because "she is not yours; she is ours (MDC)." In other words, by virtue of her ancestry, Kirsty Coventry or any other white heroine or hero belongs to the foreign-sponsored MDC formations.

Proof of this binary logic and the assigned role of the MDC formations can be found in the Daily News, April 19 2002. R. S. Mazoyo published a letter entitled "White Presence in MDC gives Zanu-PF hallucinations". The writer claimed that white people began to sit in harmony with Africans for the first time in the MDC and because of the MDC.

From there it was easy to claim that the African land reclamation movement was merely an African revenge orgy against all white people. It was driven not by desire for justice, fairness and restitution but by sheer black hatred of whites. The Daily News, June 15 2002, published a lengthy letter by one Marko Phiri, which conveyed this conflated message: Mugabe's white hate gospel has failed to poison race relations. The writer returned to paternalistic Rhodesian language of the late 1950s, race relations, rather than revolutionary solidarity.

Then on March 26 2003, The Daily News took the recasting and conflation to extremes. The President, in an address to mourners at Heroes Acre, scoffed at British efforts to portray him as an African Hitler's reputation is one of over-running other people's countries and destroying other people's nations and institutions.

On the contrary, President Mugabe's only ambition was to enable the people of Zimbabwe to reclaim and control the territory and assets of Zimbabwe and nothing more. However, The Daily News of March 26 2003 turned the meaning of the President's remark completely up side down and inside out, declaring: "Mugabe equates himself to Hitler"

Relevant Links

This MDC mission on behalf of white Rhodesians and the Euro-American white right explains the remarks shouted by the rowdy opposition MPs and Kirsty Coventry. This consistent mission, dating back to the founding of the MDC, also suggests that the opposition may not improve its behaviour even if it signs an agreement with Zanu-PF. A piece of paper may not change the mission or the history of the MDC documented here.

Thursday, 4 September 2008

UK recession in '08, warns OECD

02/09/2008

London City news: UK recession in '08, warns OECD Britons should prepare for recession this year, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) warned Tuesday.

The UK economy is set to contract at an annual rate of 0.3% during the third quarter, according to the Paris-based think tank, then by 0.4% in the final quarter of 2008. Two quarters of negative growth counts as a technical recession.

Data released by the Office for National Statistics last month showed the economy ground to a halt between April and June, prompting calls for the Bank of England to cut interest rates.

Annual growth came in at its weakest since the end of 1992, having been revised down from 1.6% to 1.4%, the same as predicted by the International Monetary Fund. The OECD cut its forecast to just 1.2% from 1.8%.

"Financial market turmoil, housing market downturns and high commodity prices continue to bear down on global growth while at the same time evolving rapidly," said the OECD's head of economics Jorgen Elmeskov.

The UK's prospects are the worst of all the G7 nations, with third quarter growth set to stall in both Germany and Italy before growing again in the following quarter by 0.1% and 0.6% respectively.

Japanese growth is seen slowing to 1.4% in the fourth quarter from 2.4% in Q3, while the US will manage growth of 0.9% in the three months to September and 0.7% at the end of the year.

Africa now attracting more foreign investment

Dong Fang Development Company, a Chinese textile shop in Nairobi. The Sino-Africa trade increased to $55 billion in 2007. Photo/ANTHONY KAMAU

By CATHERINE RIUNGU

Posted Saturday, August 30 2008 at 15:28

Africa is becoming a preferred destination for foreign direct investment despite the failure by the G8 countries to keep their Gleeneagles commitment.

Investors brought in $36 billion in 2007, almost double the 2005 figure, according to a report published by the Africa Re-insurance Corporation (Africa Re).

The report attributes the FDI growth mainly to the influx of Chinese companies.

The Sino-Africa trade increased to $55 billion in 2007 with a positive balance of $2.1 billion in favour of the continent.

The report says the increase in FDI is a reflection of a general positive growth on the continent for the fourth consecutive year.

The continent has recorded an average growth rate of more than 5 per cent, matching a general average for the world.

The rate of growth, however was dampened by the increase in oil prices and agricultural products and the resulting inflationary pressure.

The economic well being in Africa is attributed to a number of factors key among them the cessation of conflicts in the Great Lakes region, the entrenchment of peace in West Africa — Liberia and Sierra Leone — improvement in public and private governance brought about by the new generation of political leaders who are more focused on development, and the increase in the revenue from exported raw material.

The continent has defied warnings from the West that it runs the risk of accumulating its debts.

However, African countries now approach China for, which grants them significant loans within a short time, whereas the traditional lenders take time to respond to only a few of their needs and often with stringent conditions.

The biggest borrowers from China are South Africa, Angola, Nigeria and Sudan.

China, together with Singapore, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait have taken over the role of lenders to the world economy.

The leading economy on the continent — South Africa — saw a 4.5 per cent increase in gross domestic product in 2007 after an average of 3 per cent over the past 10 years.

This was attributed to an improvement in the national budget, from a deficit of 2.8 per cent in 1999 to only 0.6 per cent at the end of last year and a better debt management, which was 30 per cent of GDP, down from 50 per cent in 1994.

But inflation, which stood at less than 6 per cent then, has now increased to about 8 per cent following the surge in prices of oil and food products.

Angola attained a 24 per cent growth in its GDP due mainly to the sharp increase in the price of oil and other minerals.

The non-oil sector — agriculture, mines and construction — has regained its vitality following the resurgence of subsistence and export agriculture (coffee), diamond extraction, and the onset of reconstruction programme necessitated by the destruction caused by the civil war that ravaged that country for the past three decades.

In East Africa, Kenya, which recorded a growth of 7 per cent due to transfer of funds from the diaspora, tourism and tea, experienced post-election violence early this year marring its celebrated stability.

Analysts have projected that due to the violence, the country’s economy will grow by 4 per cent this year. But authorities say that the economy, which five years ago was on negative growth, will hit 10 per cent by 2012.

Uganda’s GDP increased by 6.2 per cent despite a deficit in energy supply while Tanzania, with similar difficulties attained a growth of 8 per cent.

The economy of Ethiopia is beginning to overheat following an 8 per cent growth in 2007 for the third year in a row, while the rate of inflation stood at 16 per cent mitigated by the purchase of cereal to be re-sold at a subsidised price by the state. That exceptional growth is attributable to vibrant agricultural activity, especially coffee, horticulture and oil seed.

A fresh view of history in East Africa


Rating

Neolithic stone tools from Machaga Cave, Zanzibar and right, one of the island’s attractions. Photo/FILE

By DANA APRIL SEIDENBERG

Posted Saturday, August 30 2008 at 16:09

WHO MIGHT HAVE GUESSED THAT broken bits of pottery, beads and bones dug up or found in caves and other sites around East Africa could change the way world history is currently viewed?

Yet today, a whole new generation of East African archaeologists are recovering artifactual remains that are radically reshaping the whole story of the Western Indian Ocean littoral.

Far from being an insignificant backwater, there is near-incontrovertible evidence that the area connected as it had been to Pharaonic Egypt, to ports around the Indian Ocean and beyond, had been pivotal to world trade.

This emerging new picture has been long in search of an author familiar enough with old documents as well as new discoveries of the past several decades to weave them into a text of lasting value.

Last month in Zanzibar, itself a centre of trans-oceanic trade going back to 3000 BC, I picked up The Unity of African Ancient History by acclaimed Tanzanian archaeologist Felix Chami at the Beit el Ajaib (House of Wonders) shop. True to its name, in between dusty displays of famous dhows and doors in miniature and battered Arab coffee pots, a wondrous treasure was to be discovered.

Who is Felix Chami and why is his new book so timely and significant? Dr Chami is perhaps Tanzania’s most prolific archaeologist, educator and theoretical innovator. While many different academics have written on aspects of East Africa in Classical Antiquity, his was an original approach to the subject at hand, written for the scholar and layperson alike.

The result is a persuasive work of synthesis that is part site-work, part contemporary academic history and part imaginative re-creation.

Chami constructs a large picture of continent-wide unity from which the book’s title is drawn.

A fresh explanation to East Africa’s coastal multi-ethnic mix revolves around a series of internal migrations over centuries to the area, relegating to the proverbial dustbin the old canard of consecutive invaders bringing sophisticated urban society to the backward people of the Western Indian Ocean.

It makes sense and is best thinking on the subject in years for understanding East Africa’s changing social landscape over the period 3000 BC to AD 500.

Referring to conventional wisdom on Ancient Egypt as the colonial paradigm so prevalent over the past 130 years, he summarises the archaeological record to date, also citing ancient and modern historians.

HERODOTUS, WRITING IN THE 5TH Century BC, already knew what it would take another 2,500 years to discover: that Egyptian Pharaonic civilisation, a constellation of unparalleled architecture, gorgeous statuary and complex cosmology remarkable for its time and for all time, had been the work of Africans.

Yet during the 19th century, Victorian academics under the spell of pseudo-science thought Africans incapable of producing institutions of such complexity and beauty.

Why? Social Darwinists particularly saw human evolution as linear — a direct line from, say, slithering lizards to the British aristocracy. Segued into ideas of white supremacy, these outlandish presuppositions with their destructive implications became convenient subtexts for imperial expansion and colonial racism.

PERHAPS MORE INSIDIOUS, the glorious civilisations of Egypt and Classical Greece had been built by Europe’s white ancestors. It was not until the l980s that Martin Bernal, a Briton working out of Cornell University, New York, produced a profoundly anti-establishment treatise subversively entitled “Black Athena.” He suggested that Ancient Egyptians were neither European nor white but rather Afro-Asiatic, a multiethnic integration of Africans and Semites that Chami interprets as simply another way of saying Africans of many hues.

Chami’s ambitious work is not just an easy armchair narrative of historical synthesis but the product of years of experience in the field and hence a valuable archaeological archive as well.
Cave sites on the islands of Mafia and Zanzibar have yielded remains of domesticated animals that have been dated to between 2800 and 800 BC.

At another cave site in Zanzibar, chicken and cattle bones have been recovered that have all been dated to between 3300 BC and O BC. As chickens were first domesticated in Mesopotamia (Modern Iraq), their spread, involving human agency, had reached East Africa in ancient times, probably as early as 3000 BC, the same time African cereals had crossed to Asia.

Also related to the 3rd millennium BC, the date marking the earliest occupation of Zanzibar, is a pendant of gum copal, derived from a tree grown in East Africa that was found in a grave in Mesopotamia, suggesting that contact between the two areas began from this period if not earlier.

About 40 kilometres into the interior in the Rufiji Delta region, pottery of Roman or Indian origin has been found — suggesting that East African trade links with Ancient Rome was not restricted to the Indian Ocean islands and littoral but had extended deep into the interior.

Potsherds from Mafia island identified as having originated in the Nile Valley and dated to 800-400 BC support early dates for trade between the Nile Valley and the East African coast.

A CARNELIAN BEAD FOUND IN a Zanzibar cave was thought to have come either from India or Egypt, while a glass bead found in the same cave is thought to have originated in India, the carbon-14 dating for this bead being 135 to 45 BC.

Also discovered at Mafia Island were more beads and pottery from India attesting to a brisk trade between the two areas as well as two glass beads of Mediterranean origin dated from 300 BC to AD 400.

Chami’s exhaustive work, though a gem, is unfortunately unpolished. A crack editor should have been called in to keep the texture and contours of this complex, invaluable narrative in harmony, on track and lucid.

The author’s anarchistic English, his meandering sentences and tedious repetition of ideas and phrases, the result perhaps of returning again and again to the manuscript after long lapses in time, leave the reader gasping for air.

Manuscripts produced everywhere demand serious attention by skilled professionals. In this part of the world, dilettantism in publishing scholarly work is a general problem that surely must be resolved before the area can become truly competitive in the industry.

It bears repeating that no scholarly work or for that matter journal and newspaper articles as well as works of fiction should be allowed to go to press without the expertise of experienced editors. Book jackets are also crying out for talented graphic designers to make them attractive.

Without the input of these too often unacknowledged professionals, Chami’s endeavour falls just a bit short of being the crowning achievement of a life’s work that it aspires to be, at those giddy heights of universal scholarly excellence on East Africa in antiquity waiting to be scaled once more.

UK firms losing business in Kenya to China, India

By CHARLES WACHIRA

Posted Saturday, August 30 2008 at 15:53

When Kenya purchased Toyota vehicles for its military forces, instead of the all-pervasive Land Rover, it signalled a seismic change — in effect ending the most favoured status enjoyed by imports sourced from its erstwhile colonial master the UK.

Another example is De la Rue, a UK-based printing and security firm that has uninterruptedly printed Kenyan currency since independence. It is fighting to retain its contract.

The administration of Mwai Kibaki broke with tradition, inviting other internationally recognised firms to bid for the job.

The London-based firm J&S Franklin Ltd served as a single-source supplier of uniforms and combat kits for the armed forces since Kenya “unshackled” itself from British colonial rule in 1963.

It has recently been blackballed by Kenya’s Department of Defence when its contract was terminated to the benefit of a Chinese firm.

Similarly, Brooke Marine and Vosper Thornycroft, two British companies that have exclusively supplied ships to Kenya’s navy since independence, have had to contend with the phenomenon of open tendering.

This change of fortune for British firms is captured in the official annual economic survey cobbled together by the country’s Ministry of Finance. In 2007, imports from the UK were worth Ksh29,414 million ($4.9 million) — compared to China’s Ksh45,668 million ($7.6 million) or India’s Ksh56,815 million ($9.5 million).

Compare this with 2001 during the peremptory reign of Daniel arap Moi. UK imports then totalled Ksh21,989 million ($3.7 million) while China was at a much lower Ksh6,792 million ($1.1 million) and Indian imports amounted to a relatively puny Ksh12,830 million ($2.1 million).

Since the replacement of Moi’s government in 2003, it has taken China and India three years only for their imports to Kenya to overtake those from the UK, formerly a premier source of imports.

“It is as a result of prudent decision-making that the Kenyan government opened up the country to the Far East, including Asian countries. As a result, Kenya has been able to access countries that provide better deals,” says Dr Gerrishon Ikiara, a former permanent secretary in the Kibaki administration and currently a senior lecturer at the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Nairobi. “In the past, procurement of government goods was shrouded in mystery. Then political considerations mattered more than economic sense,” he said.

According to the economist, Asian countries offer competitively priced goods and services compared with the UK.

“Right now most of Kenya’s roads are either being refurbished or built anew by Chinese firms. And all our international airports are also being upgraded by Chinese owned firms. This is after going through the process of open tendering,” Dr Ikiara said.

Kwame Otieno, a senior researcher with the local think-tank, the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), blames “the rigidity of the British system” as the fillip triggering the dip in British imports. The IEA is a non-governmental organisation that promotes debate on policy issues.

Related Stories

“If a Kenyan, for example, wants to visit the UK, they face a lot of stringent requirements that act as a hindrance. But if they wish to travel to the Far East, China or India, the process is enabling and travel-friendly.”

Sources said the change in bilateral trade relations between the UK and Kenya is as a result of poor relations between the political leaders of the two countries in the recent past.

It is argued that Moi had very cordial relationships with occupants of 10 Downing Street in London. Successive British governments deliberately turned a blind eye to the excesses of his government.

As a result, firms with British ties continued to receive lucrative contracts at the expense of other countries.

The Kibaki regime has been upbraided harshly, particularly by local British envoys, for failing to tame corruption in high places.

Confirming the bad blood between the two countries, Sir Edward Clay, British envoy from 2001 to 2005, was in early 2008 officially declared persona non grata by the Kenyan government.