Africabeat

Mahmoud Mamdani on Darfur

I have in the past on this blog taken potshots at the SaveDarfurers; my essential criticism is that many seem like hypocrites or bandwagoners engaging in advocacy without really understanding what it is they are advocating or why.  (I don't necessarily mean that you are, rather only that most are.)

The most common defense I hear from readers runs somewhere along the lines of, "at least they're doing something!" or "but we can't just do nothing!  we have to do something!"  or "doing something is better than doing nothing at all" etc.

Something. Nothing. Nothing something nothing.

Mahmoud Mamdani, I believe, offers an explanation for this stunning lack of articulateness in an essay  published last March in the London Review of Books when he argues that in America, the Darfur conflict has been "emptied of its political content."  He reasons this is why it's easier for sunny college kids to advocate the end of mass murder in Darfur than in Iraq, where we Americans are much more conscious that the situation has moral and political complexities--even if we can't exactly name them--not to mention our own complicity in their creation; or at least I naively cling to the hope that we have become aware of that much, even though it is certainly easier to wage a theoretical battle against a theoretical evil in lands that may as well be theoretical than it is to admit your own, very concrete sins.

From the Democracy Now interview:

Well, I was struck by the fact—because I live nine months in New York and three months in Kampala, and every morning I open the New York Times, and I read about sort of violence against civilians, atrocities against civilians, and there are two places that I read about—one is Iraq, and the other is Darfur—sort of constantly, day after day, and week after week. And I’m struck by the fact that the largest political movement against mass violence on US campuses is on Darfur and not on Iraq. And it puzzles me, because most of these students, almost all of these students, are American citizens, and I had always thought that they should have greater responsibility, they should feel responsibility, for mass violence which is the result of their own government’s policies. And I ask myself, “Why not?” I ask myself, “How do they discuss mass violence in Iraq and options in Iraq?” And they discuss it by asking—agonizing over what would happen if American troops withdrew from Iraq. Would there be more violence? Less violence? But there is no such agonizing over Darfur, because Darfur is a place without history, Darfur is a place without politics. Darfur is simply a dot on the map. It is simply a place, a site, where perpetrator confronts victim. And the perpetrator’s name is Arab, and the victim’s name is African. And it is easy to demonize. It is easy to hold a moral position which is emptied of its political content. This bothered me, and so I wrote about it. (emphasis added)

A very smart man with very many smart things to say.  Read more of this argument in Mamdani's LRB essay or check out the Democracy Now interview transcript.

Zimbabwe: China Withdraws Support for Mugabe Regime

I've just read a headline I've been anticipating for some time.

China, Zimbabwe's biggest trading partner and source of aid (in no small part because the rest of the world has embargoed it!) announced it will cut off all non-humanitarian support for Robert Mugabe's regime according to Lord Malloch Brown, Britain's foreign minister.

This is BIG NEWS, at least from where I'm standing. 

China's also gotten tougher on Sudan of late. Perhaps the powers that be in Beijing believe they might gain more by playing better with the international community. 

At the very least, they can smell change in the air.  Zimbabwe's no longer bankable, no longer a country in which to make long-term investments in industries or in people. Politically, I get the sense that things could turn in any number of directions at any moment. 

This isn't the Cold War anymore.  China was cozy with Zimbabwe and sold them all the neat internet filtering and radio jamming technologies its own government so enthusiastically employs.  But it was never about ideology.  It was about strategic interest.  And for whatever reason, China's decided it's no longer in its interest to throw its weight behind Robert Mugabe.

(From the Daily Telegraph) Lord Malloch Brown said he had been informed of the change by Liu Guijin, China's new special envoy on African issues. He said he hoped China would join the rest of the international community in refusing to "offer a lifeline" to Mr Mugabe's failed regime, which has led to near universal unemployment and record inflation.

Privately, diplomats believe that while Zimbabwe once seemed like an opportunity for China to make diplomatic gains in an area abandoned by Western countries, Beijing had been unable to avoid the evidence of the harm being done to Zimbabwe's people.

It was hard to see what long-term result China could get when Zimbabwe failed to meet basic standards of economic discipline

• "Zimbabwe: China to Withdraw Support for Mugabe Regime" (SW Radio Africa)
• "China is to withdraw backing for Mugabe" (Daily Telegraph)
   

Notes on Rwanda, Democracy & Authoritarianism

A few weeks ago, I wrote a very optimistic post about Rwanda for the Guardian's Comment is Free.  A very many people accused me of being a propagandist mouthpiece for Kagame, although I wasn’t sure how much weight to give certain comments once the conversation descended into a debate about whether there was ever a genocide in Rwanda.

But then I received an email I could not ignore.  It was written by an aid worker who has been living in Rwanda for 3 years and who undoubtedly has a much deeper understanding of the country than I possibly can.  She found my depiction of the situation there "appalling."

France: World Food Program grants starving peasants grain

I was having dinner with a French-British Afrophile journalist friend here in Kigali the other night.  It involved a lot of shouting and righteous anger even though we agreed with each other.  Again the topic turned to aid.  My journalist friend said something along these lines.  I've elaborated:

France, 1788:  The countryside is plagued by major food shortages.  Mobs are lynching tax collectors.  The government, which has squandered all of its tax revenue on foreign wars and luxury goods for the ruling elite, asks the international community for assistance.  The World Food Program starts distributing grain.  They are a major success!  They save the lives of thousands who may have died of famine or malnutrition.   (Had they known how many would have died under the blade of the guillotine, they would have given even more food.)  The Bourbons live to see another day, and the international community implores them to be nicer.  They run training workshops to sensitize the peasants on their rights as citizens.

D.R. of Congo: Should Christian Revivalist Churches Be Encouraging Political Activism?

Continuing an age-old debate–is religion the “opium of the people” or can it be a catalyst for social change?–Congolese blogger Blaise Mantoto at UDPS Liege says the Congo’s Christian revivalist churches, which he cynically refers to as “for-profit spiritual shops,”
encourage political disengagement [Fr]. He calls on revivalist churches to rewrite their missions, arguing they should inspire their followers to improve their social and economic situation through political activism.

UDPS Liege is the Belgium-based branch of the Union for Democracy and Social Progress, a major Congolese opposition party and a vocal critic of Joseph Kabila, the President of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Revivalist and charismatic churches have become increasingly popular in the Congo–at the expense of Catholic churches–by offering magical and miraculous solutions to the misery and insecurity Congolese have faced for decades. (These churches have also made news for making money off of the cruel exorcisms of child witches.)

But whether or not these churches encourage apathy, not everyone agrees that religion and politics should mix.

Read the rest at Global Voices

"France Will Be on the Side of the Oppressed...This is France's Identity, France's History"

I was watching the official announcement of the 2007 French Presidential Election along with about 200 French expatriates in a bar in Beijing on Sunday; my presence there was unplanned, but there I was, and then there Nicolas Sarkozy was, delivering his acceptance speech live on the big screen.

I've written elsewhere about how I appreciated Sarkozy's gallantry in saying he respected Segolene Royal and her ideas.  Maybe the French Left collectively rolled their eyes, but it was a gesture I appreciated, if only because I've forgotten what it's like to have a president who acts presidential.

But then there was the last part of the speech, the part the nearly made me spray my drink on innocent spectators standing in front of me.

Chinese Perceptions of Hu's Visit to Africa

I've been meaning to write something about Hu's Africa trip, but life has gotten busy of late.  To tide you over, here is a fascinating post from Jacky Peng, a Global Voices contributor and Singapore-based blogger on Chinese perception of their leader's visit to the continent:

Who is visiting Africa?

Chinese President Hu Jintao is on a 10-day-visit to Africa now. Many state-owned news media such as Xinhua News Agency and People’s Daily, headline his visit on their websites’ front page almost everyday. His tour has also attracted attention from Chinese netizens.

The Chinese government regards Hu’s visit as a great diplomatic victory. Many Chinese echo with exultance.

A popular post applaudeded Hu’s effort in Sudan’s Darfur crisis, China vs. the US in Africa: Bush failed, Hu Jintao succeeded!!!

在俺们胡哥的亲切的微笑中，达尔富尔问题就这样解冻了！在俺们胡哥的亲切的微笑中，联合国的维和部队就快要进住了！

布什做不到的，胡哥在微笑中做到了！！！

中非友谊是真正的友谊！！！！！！！！！

支持胡哥！

Our brother Hu thawed the Darfur crisis with his cordial smile! The United Nations peacekeeping force is going to station (in Darfur) with his cordial smile!

Bush failed, brother Hu succeeded with smile!!!

Sino-Africa friendship is a true friendship!!!!!!

Support brother Hu!!!!

(Read Jacky's post in full at Global Voices)

Guinea-Conakry: The End of a Dictatorship?

Conakry, capital of the francophone West African country of Guinea, is bracing for a new round of violence following last month's general strike which left at least 59 dead and 1400 injured.  The strikes were organized by Guinea's powerful labor unions to pressure President Lansana Conte, an aging dictator, to appoint a prime minister without ties to the current regime and devolve some of his considerable powers.  On January 28, after an 18-day standstill, Conte and the unions reached a deal.

However, union leaders are unhappy with President Lansana Conte's choice of prime minister, and are planning to go ahead with a second round of strikes, due to start tomorrow.  In the last few days, 8 civilians have already been killed, including two in an incident were presidential security forces opened fire on youths throwing stones (Fr) at the president's motorcade.

By all accounts, the unions have considerable support among the Guinean people, who also want Conte to share power or step down.

Read the rest of this post on Global Voices

States and Power in Africa

States and Power in Africa - I first realized I wanted to be a political scientist while reading this book for the second time. Stresses imposed borders, population density and distribution, and the problem of "broadcasting" authority across vast tracts of sparsely populated lands as key challenges of African political development. 

In the words of Wikipedia, this article is only a stub.  I'm gonna expand it at some point.  For now, all I have to say is that this book rocks.  I don't agree with every single argument, but it still rocks.