This is my beef with Nkrumaism. Get these inept governments off our backs and the individuals can build a better lives for themselves.
This is my beef with Nkrumaism. Get these inept governments off our backs and the individuals can build a better lives for themselves.
Mahmoud 9 years ago
It is a disaster!
It is a disaster!
Mahmoud 9 years ago
Author: Kafui Ama
Date: 2009-07-23 01:44:06
Please be patient and read this to the end.
By Craig Murray, former Deputy British High Commisssioner to Ghana | Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
... It was Novembe ... read full comment
Author: Kafui Ama
Date: 2009-07-23 01:44:06
Please be patient and read this to the end.
By Craig Murray, former Deputy British High Commisssioner to Ghana | Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
... It was November 1999 and I'd been Deputy High Commissioner in Ghana for almost a year - the culmination of 15 years' Foreign Office service in Nigeria, Warsaw and the equatorial Africa department in London.
I'd always been passionate about Africa and had immersed myself in its minutiae. Nevertheless, my father, who had a timber yard in Ghana in the Sixties, offered a little extra counsel before I departed, aged 40. 'If you see any good-looking girl, aged about 30, light skinned, whatever you do, don't touch her - she could be your sister!'
Not that this was a big concern for me. My most pressing duty was the 1999 State Visit by the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, Enhanced Coverage Linking the Duke of Edinburgh, -Search using: Biographies Plus News, Most Recent 60 Days, accompanied by Robin Cook, the then Foreign Secretary. It was a three-day blur of activity, the teeming crowds displaying an uncomplicated and old-fashioned reverence.
A warning that the Duke was averse to looking at things without useful purpose proved absolutely right. As we stood looking at the strip of brass laid in a churchyard that marked the line of the Greenwich Meridian, he said to me: 'A line in the ground, eh? Very nice.'
Ghana epitomises much of the best of Africa, but also throws into relief the tragedy of the continent. It has maintained its higher education and has fewer extremes of wealth than elsewhere. But at independence in 1957, Ghana was richer than Argentina, Brazil, Malaysia or Singapore. Today, those countries are at least ten times as wealthy.
Corruption, cronyism, economic mismanagement, irresponsible lending by the West and the dumping of cheap food all did for Ghana. When I arrived with my wife Fiona and children Jamie and Emily, Ghana had been ruled for 20 years by Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlings.
The son of a Stirlingshire pharmacist and a local woman, he seized power in a coup in 1979, but claimed to have won presidential elections in 1992 and 1996, despite allegations of vote-rigging.
In his early years, Rawlings unleashed a political terror on Ghana. His campaign against the middle classes resembled Mao's Cultural Revolution. People were persecuted for having savings or two indoor lavatories. Market women were sometimes killed for 'profiteering'.
The Queen's visit delighted Rawlings, who craved international respectability. I, too, was determined to make the most of the trip, by helping ensure Rawlings gave up power by the start of 2001, as the constitution required because he had served two four-year terms.
The Queen's speech to the parliament in the capital, Accra, was to be the focus of the visit and I had contributed to its drafting. It contained the usual guff about a future based upon partnership, but there was a sting in the tail. 'Next, year, Mr President,' the Queen intoned, 'you will step down after two terms in office in accordance with your constitution.' The opposition benches went wild and the Queen stopped, looking in bewilderment at the hullabaloo.
Afterwards, Robin Cook was furious. 'It's a disaster. Who the hell drafted that?'
'Er, I did, Secretary of State,' I said. 'I might have guessed! Who the hell approved it?' 'You did.' Cook's Private Secretary had to dig out the draft he had signed. After the State banquet, I retired to a hotel bar with the Royal Household. The senior staff had withdrawn to allow the butlers, footmen and hairdressers to let off steam.
The party appeared, to a man, to be gay. Not just gay, but outrageously camp. We'd taken the hotel for the Royal party, but allowed the British Airways crew to stay. Now three cabin stewards, two Royal footmen and a Royal hairdresser were grouped around the piano singing hits from Cabaret. I was seated on a sofa and across from me in an armchair was a member of the Household who seemed out of place. The valet looked to be in his 60s, a grizzled NCO with tufts of hair either side of a bald pate, a boxer's nose and tattoos on his arms.
He was smoking roll-ups. I turned to the old warrior and said: 'Don't you find all this a bit strange sometimes?' He lent forward, put his hand on my bare knee below the kilt I wore on ceremonial occasions and said: 'Listen, ducks. I was in the Navy for 30 years.' I think he was joking, but some things are too weird even for me. The lower reaches of the Royal Household are one of them.
One enjoyable aspect of our time in Ghana was the constant stream of visitors. Among them was Peter Hain, the Minister for Africa. Hain, a good footballer, agreed to play in a charity match between children from a community football scheme and the High Commission.
Unfortunately, the ground was hard and the opposition turned out to be super-fit professionals. After a heavy tackle, I went down. Result: a dislocated shoulder. I couldn't move my arm for eight weeks. Other visitors included Clare Short, at the time Secretary of State for International Development.
She was in Ghana to try to persuade it to join a debt relief scheme. At a dinner for her, a Minister had made a speech about how much Ghana had learnt from the British Empire. Short stood up and expostulated: 'The British Empire! Don't tell me about the British Empire. I know about British colonialism. My father was Irish and we know about British colonialism. I'll tell you what the British did to your country. They exploited it, that's what they did. They exploited it.' After a few moments of stunned silence, the dinner continued.
On another occasion we were joined by Bobby Charlton, who came to Ghana seeking support for England's bid to host the 2006 World Cup. He was still an astounding player at 60 and it was good of him to get on the pitch for a local community football programme. Nevertheless, I found Charlton disappointing. He was self-centred and ratty - one of those heroes you wish you hadn't met.
Conversely, Roger Moore, a UNICEF goodwill ambassador, was charming and suave, just as you would expect, with a fund of brilliant stories beginning with lines such as: 'One day, Frank, Dean, Tony and I decided to play a trick on Marilyn ... ' He was also well briefed about children's issues in Ghana and was prepared not just to do PR, but to get his hands dirty helping in refugee camps without a camera in sight.
I was less taken with Jamie Theakston.
The BBC were filming a wildlife programme in Ghana, looking at the endangered green turtle population near Ada. A group of young volunteers had accompanied the BBC team to help the newly-born turtles to reach the ocean. But one girl, in her mid-20s, had streams of mascara running down her cheeks. She claimed Theakston had just broken up with her - yet here he was, surrounded by young women, enjoying the adulation.
I had bigger concerns, however. Ghana's presidential and parliamentary elections were due in December 2000 and there were signs that its 11 million voters might be preparing for a change of government. Enthusiasm for politics was everywhere. Even in the meanest village, people gathered under the banyan tree listening to FM stations on a battered transistor and arguing about the coming change.
In the West, tired of our politicians' deceit, we no longer much value democracy. It is wonderful to see a people exercising for the first time their power over those who would govern them. Our job was to see the elections were free and fair, with Britain funding a £10 million programme for photo-ID cards to reduce electoral fraud. The exercise eradicated one million fake names.
Another practical new weapon was indelible ink: when somebody voted, their thumb was painted to stop them casting more than one vote. India was the only source of a truly permanent ink that could not be washed or rubbed off. I had also persuaded the Foreign Office to provide experts from the Electoral Reform Society. Further valuable additions were two British MPs, Roger Gale and Nigel Jones.
Rawlings's party, the National Democratic Congress (NDC), put up the vice President, John Atta Mills, as its presidential candidate. The opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) fielded John Kufuor. There is a tribal element in Ghanaian politics: the Ewe people vote overwhelmingly NDC; the Ashanti overwhelmingly NPP.
It was clear the governing party would not abandon power easily. Alarmed that it would lose, it had the high court declare the ID cards illegal because they disenfranchised legitimate voters. But the ruling was to no avail - the people took over. Polling station officers decided they were going to use ID cards anyway.
When first- round votes on December 7 were tallied; Kufuor had 48.4 per cent against Atta Mills's 44.8 per cent. The opposition was heading for a small majority but, with no candidate exceeding 50 per cent, a run- off was required. Ghana's 30 or so FM stations were vital in bringing democracy, so it was no surprise that the NDC moved against them.
On the evening before the poll, I took Roger Gale and Nigel Jones to visit Joy FM, possibly Ghana's most influential station. We were sitting in the office when an armed posse of Rawlings's security men arrived, saying they were closing the station on the President's instructions.
‘Good evening,' I said. ‘I am Craig Murray, Deputy British High Commissioner, and these gentlemen are Mr Roger Gale MP and Mr Nigel Jones MP, members of the British Parliament.' Gale added: ' Obviously there has been some mistake.
I thought I heard you say that you were closing down the station, but we are here to visit our fellow democracy, Ghana, and democracies don't close down radio stations.' The goons left. Joy FM never was closed. However, the NDC started to think I was a part of their problem and they assigned a secret service team to follow me around.
As the second round on December 28 approached, we discovered a problem: not enough Indian ink. We had paid for more, but it had to be specially made and would not be ready until December 24. This was cutting it tight and action was needed. Chartering a private plane to set off from India on Christmas Eve was easier said than done. Whitehall was in festive mode and unlikely to sanction spending quickly, so I used the Embassy's budget to pay for it.
Ghana's government did not want the Indian ink to get in and I was concerned it would be delayed by customs officials. So on Christmas Day 2000, instead of eating turkey, I stood baking on the airport tarmac. When our plane taxied in, we unloaded the boxes of little ink bottles on to two trucks. I escorted these out of the VIP gateway, helped by a substantial tip to the guards.
The truck drivers then delivered the ink to regional centres for distribution to constituencies. This was a game being played for high stakes, with real danger of civil war.
Hotheads in the ruling party might claim electoral fraud and mount a military takeover. The Ashanti could also react violently to losing. Every embassy was updating evacuation plans. Around 1am, the results started to come in. There was a more or less consistent swing to the opposition candidate, John Kufuor. You could have cut the atmosphere with a knife.
The coolest man in Ghana that night was the wry, chain-smoking Electoral Commissioner, Kwadwo Afari- Gyan, who received constant threatening phone calls instructing him to fix the result. Each time, the Electoral Commissioner replied: ' The result will be what the result will be. I am just making sure it is fairly counted.' Then, taking his umpteenth call, he stiffened. He summoned me to listen: it was his wife. Soldiers had come to their bungalow, taking her and his children hostage and threatening to kill them if he did not deliver the ' right' result.
Kwadwo barked down the phone: ' Put their leader on.' ‘Listen you little *****,' he snarled. 'How dare you come to my house and threaten my wife and children. I am sitting here with the British Deputy High Commissioner and he knows what is happening. Now get out of my home before we have you thrown into jail!' The soldier said: ' Yes, sir; sorry, sir.' Kwadwo then told his wife not to worry and calmly returned to his work.
By 3am on the second night only two constituencies were still to declare. Even if every voter there went for Atta Mills, Kufuor could still not be beaten.
The opposition had won - an African country ... had shown that democratic change could be achieved peacefully. Kufuor's eight years as President saw economic growth of more than 70 per cent - the first prolonged period since independence when Ghana was not getting poorer. But Ghanaians chose to exercise their democratic right to change and earlier this month narrowly elected Atta Mills.
Ghana is the only country in Africa to achieve the democratic norm of power alternating peacefully between parties at successive uninterrupted elections.
As I look back on my involvement with Africa over 30 years, I remain most proud of helping Ghanaians to attain democracy. It is an example that sadly, the rest of the continent has so far done little to follow.
But Ghana remains there - a glimmer of hope, an example to others and a rebuke to cynics who claim democracy is not possible in Africa.
francis kwarteng 9 years ago
Kwadwo,
Nkrumahism also produced/influenced the likes of Nelson Mandela and several others. Nkrumahism also influenced Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Toure) and greatly impacted the Civil Rig ... read full comment
Kwadwo,
Nkrumahism also produced/influenced the likes of Nelson Mandela and several others. Nkrumahism also influenced Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Toure) and greatly impacted the Civil Rights Movement in the 60s. Go and read the writings of Malcolm x, Martin Luther King, Jr., and other greats of the Civil Rights Movement. Today Martin Luther King, Jr. has a national holiday named in his honor in America. Talk about the power of Nkrumahism!
Were the non-democratic and dictatorial Busia and Danquah products of Nkrumahism?
Is the Queen of England (who is 89 and Mugabe who is 90) not the de facto head of several states around the world?
Has the Queen of England not been the de facto head of these states since 1952 and Mugabe since 1980?
Do you have any idea what the British were doing to half---if not more than half---of the world's population when she resumed the throne in 1952?
Do you have any idea what the British were doing to Black Zimbabweans (including birth control experiments on Black Zimbabwean women) in 1952 and thereafter when the Queen of England resumed her de facto headship?
What did the Queen of England do for Black South Africa when White South Africa treated members of the latter as animals?
Did Margaret Thatcher not oppose sanctions against Apartheid South Africa, claiming that the sanctions would strengthen the hand of Apartheid instead? What did the de facto head of South African then, the Queen of England, say in that regard?
This is not to overlook Mugabe's shortcomings or to bring in the politics of equalization. Bishop Tutu and others have been calling for Tony Blair and George W. Bush to be put on trial for their illegal invasion of Iraq, what has IMANI been saying? Where was IMANI when America was secretly selling arms to Iraq and Iran during their 8-year war?
Has the leadership of IMANI seen declassified information where America provided Saddam Hussein with intelligence (and approval) to gas Kurds and Iranians, only for America to use the gassing incident as one of its justifications for toppling Saddam Hussein? What has since happened to Libya and Iraq? Did the West (America particularly) and with allies such as Saudi Arabia create Al-Qaeda and the Taliban? Where were IMANI when these were all going on? Does IMANI know how many children and women and men that illegal war in Iraq killed?
The Spanish judge who gathered evidence to put George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Alberto Gonzalez, and others on international trial is now being hounded in Spain against the backdrop of frivolous, politically-motivated charges!
No wonder Donald Rumsfeld was sneaked out of Spain when an indictment went out for his arrest! A team of international jurists have tried and convicted George W. Bush and his colleagues in Malaysia. What is IMANI doing to bring these folks to trial?
Did the CIA not work with Charles Taylor in the 80s as Taylor revealed to the international court at his trial? What is IMANI doing to bring Charles Taylor’s Western collaborators to trial? What did the leadership of IMANI say as Rev. Pat Robertson had commercial relations with Charles Taylor (as Rev. Pat Robertson sis with Mobuto Sese Seko, America’s darling, by using his private plane to ship illegal diamond from Zaire into the United States)? What is IMANI saying about all these?
You have all these wrongs going in the world and IMANI is here with its hypocrisy and double standards as usual. Is the African Union not a democratic body? What is wrong if a democratic body democratically elects one of its members to lead it?
What is IMANI saying about the brutal regimes of Paul Kagame and Yoweri Museveni, both darlings of the West, with Kagame being friends with Bill Gates, Tony Blair, the owner of Starbuck, and other influential Western leaders? Where is the democracy in Rwanda?
IMANI has turned a blind eye to what Western multinationals and Western intelligence (and their puppets like Kagame and Yoweri) are doing in Eastern Congo (so far some estimates say 5 million Congolese have died) and talking about Mugabe instead? Is the leadership of IMANI more intelligent than the men and women who voted for Mugabe to lead the African Union? Let me stop else I will not finish.
For you Kwadwo:
MR. Enoch Ampofo, the man who received one of South Africa’s National Awards on behalf of the Nkrumah family and the Ghanaian government, had this to say as he learned it in South Africa:
“GAINING PERSPECTIVES INTO HOW DR. KWAME NKRUMAH HAS AFFECTED THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH AFRICA, I FOUND OUT THAT BACK IN THE DAYS OF APARTHEID, THE OPPRESSED PEOPLE WENT TO SCHOOL AND WERE TAUGHT ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES OF KWAME NKRUMAH OR NKRUMAHISM.”
Kwadwo, I have left some questions for you to answer (See my article). NKRUMAHISM IS ALIVE AND KICKING AS NEVER BEFORE!
All errors are mine.
Have a great weekend.
SARPONG 9 years ago
Francis, I continue to avoid your lair but since none of those Nkrumah apologists have been able to define the theory of "Nkrumaism" to me and you are a proponent of this idealism, maybe you can help me understand what Nkruma ... read full comment
Francis, I continue to avoid your lair but since none of those Nkrumah apologists have been able to define the theory of "Nkrumaism" to me and you are a proponent of this idealism, maybe you can help me understand what Nkrumaism is.
Those who have tried regurgitate socialism lite to me and if Nkrumaism is socialism, then this Nkrumaism is not anything original but a stealing of an idea and plastering it with a new name.
President Nyerere of Tanzania who Nkrumah saw as an opponent and a real creator of "Uhuruism" as a political and economic problem solving policy at least has an original idea unlike this Nkrumaism which is not original but another socialism coinage.
francis kwarteng 9 years ago
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order closing Congress, effective im ... read full comment
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order closing Congress, effective immediately.
The President said that the move would dramatically increase the efficiency of the federal government, noting how much he had accomplished since he stopped working with Congress in November.
Additionally, he said, the elimination of Congress would result in annual savings of more than five billion dollars, which Obama said would be refunded to American taxpayers.
Acknowledging that “some sticklers” would argue that the Constitution calls for three branches of government, the President said, “All this order does is reduce that number by one.”
The initial public reaction to the President’s decision appeared to be overwhelmingly positive, as news of the executive order sent his approval rating soaring to seventy-nine percent.
Asked by reporters if he had any message for members of Congress, the President said, “I got it from here.”
SARPONG 9 years ago
Another Nkrumah believer who can't even define the meaning of Nkrumaish.
Another Nkrumah believer who can't even define the meaning of Nkrumaish.
SARPONG 9 years ago
You are wrong trying to get credit for Nkrumaism for Martin Luther King's achievement. Whilst Nkrumah and his adherents were agitating for confrontation with Colonial masters to achieve independence, Martin Luther King was pr ... read full comment
You are wrong trying to get credit for Nkrumaism for Martin Luther King's achievement. Whilst Nkrumah and his adherents were agitating for confrontation with Colonial masters to achieve independence, Martin Luther King was preaching peaceful demonstration for the rights of Blacks in America.
Whilst Martin Luther King might have admired Nkrumah's zeal for his fight for Independence for Ghana and other Africa nations, their political journeys were in opposite directions. Martin Luther King was not a believer in Nkrumah Communist and socialist ideas. How can you even put Stockie Carmicheal, Malcolm X etc in the same category as Martin Luther King when their political beliefs were in diametrically opposite directions? In your zeal to get credit for Nkrumaism, you have marshalled all Black people achievement as having originated from Nkrumaism. Blacks in America even before Nkrumah entered Gold Coast politics were at the forefront of fighting for their emancipation from slave laws and their rights as citizens of USA to be part of the political field and Nkrumaism has nothing to do with them.
Individuals in the Black America community has admiration for Nkrumah fighting spirit to see to the independence of Africa countries but to say Nkrumaism influenced their beliefs is stretching the truth.
Pelicles 9 years ago
You know the how the fetus of Nkrumah was formed in his mother's womb till he became our first leader. My question to you is, who was his vice president when he was our president? Nkrumah is being praised as if he did everyt ... read full comment
You know the how the fetus of Nkrumah was formed in his mother's womb till he became our first leader. My question to you is, who was his vice president when he was our president? Nkrumah is being praised as if he did everything on his own without relying on the West. The problem facing us today was the result of his bad and reckless policies. As a young nation, why was he rushing to unite the entire continent at a time he knew was "impossible"? I said that because he couldn't fight or evict the European powers off the continent
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order closing Congress, effective immediately.
The President said that the move would dramatically increase the efficiency of the federal government, noting how much he had accomplished since he stopped working with Congress in November.
Additionally, he said, the elimination of Congress would result in annual savings of more than five billion dollars, which Obama said would be refunded to American taxpayers.
Acknowledging that “some sticklers” would argue that the Constitution calls for three branches of government, the President said, “All this order does is reduce that number by one.”
The initial public reaction to the President’s decision appeared to be overwhelmingly positive, as news of the executive order sent his approval rating soaring to seventy-nine percent.
Asked by reporters if he had any message for members of Congress, the President said, “I got it from here.”
Most of these corrupt African leaders have their strongest support in the West, not in Africa. Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni, and the late dictator of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi had their strongest support from the West. ... read full comment
Kwadwo,
Most of these corrupt African leaders have their strongest support in the West, not in Africa. Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni, and the late dictator of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi had their strongest support from the West.
Robert Mugabe would never be a pariah had he been a darling of the West. What didn’t Mobuto do? Let me give you two instances: The British scholar (and six other scholars from Africa) wrote an influential book "Zimbabwe's Land Reforms: Myths and Realities" to discredit the myths and lies perpetrated in the Western against the relative success of Mugabe's land reforems. Until this thoroughly-researched work came out, the Western press fabricated fat lies about Zimbabwea's land reforms. Now, when this leading British scholar came out with his findings the myths and lies quickly died away.
Second, even while America (and the rest of the West) had imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe the American government secretly went behind its sanctions (to negotiate with Robert Mugabe the "dictator") to buy US$10 MILLION worth of diamond from Zimbabwe. After the deal was sealed the Washington Post reported it briefly in one of its obscure pages (this happened close to the late 2000s). None of the major American papers bothered to report on this shameful deal!
What didn’t Felix Houphouët-Boigny do? What didn’t pw Bother do? What didn’t Omar Bongo do? What didn’t Augusto Pinochet do? What didn’t Saddam Hussein do?
What didn’t the Shah of Iran do? What didn’t Gnassingbe Eyadema do? What didn’t Forbes Burnham do? What didn’t “Papa Doc” Duvalier and “Baby Doc” Duvalier do? What didn’t Fulgencio Batista do? And several around! Their greatest support always came from the West. Who was Mobuto’s biggest supporter?
Charles Taylor, for instance, revealed to the world his close collaboration with the American CIA in the 80s at his international trial. Look at the funny excuse the Americans have given us about Taylor’s escape from an American prison. Nobody is even discussing his close yet illegal commercial ties with Rev. Pat Robertson (the same thing Rev. Robertson did with Mobuto, recalling that Rev. Pat Robertson successfully lobbied for Mobuto (and Taylor) in the US Congress.
The late Omar Bongo had to pay millions of US dollars just to court the friendship and protection of the Bush Administration.
Remember also that this came out during the lobbying controversy between Jack Abramoff and the American government, which sent Abramoff to prison (Read “JACK ABRAMOFF SCANDALS”; I believe you might be aware of this scandal and the many careers it destroyed; see what this scandal did to the political career of Tom Delay). Omar Bongo also bankrolled the presidencies of Jacque Chirac and others while his people went hungry!
Anyway your commentary on Adam Smith’s invisible hand and greed and state intervention is spot on.
The time has come for Africa to stand up together and fight with one voice the attempts by the metropolitan powers to dictate who is a legitimate leader in Africa and who is not. The history of such dictation shows the pursuit of Western self-interest at the cost of African nationalist interests, writes Dr Motsoko Pheko.
Zimbabwe is once again a wake-up call to all Africans who value their national sovereignty and control of their mineral wealth and other natural resources. The sustained attack on Zimbabwe is an economic war by Western countries on Africa.
These countries have a long history of a “planned regime”. If this fails, they resort to “regime change”. To Britain and America, and all their satellites, “democracy” and “legitimacy” is when their interests prevail over those of the African people.
It is reported that the American, British, Canadian and Australian governments do not believe that the recent election results in Zimbabwe represent the will of the people of Zimbabwe.
It is, therefore, important to point out that for all the long years when African states and the United Nations demanded economic sanctions against Ian Smith’s rebel colonial regime in Rhodesia and against apartheid South Africa, the European powers (led by the USA) opposed these sanctions. Britain’s Margaret Thatcher argued that sanctions would hurt “ordinary Rhodesians and black South Africans”.
This was all false. The countries of Western Europe had long had a “planned regime” strategy during the colonial days in Africa. This was put in place immediately they got a signal that Africans were determined to end colonialism and all forms of domination.
In Zimbabwe, the Western countries preferred Bishop Abel Muzorewa. Many attempts were made to assassinate Robert Mugabe even after the signing of the Lancaster House Agreement in 1979. In colonial Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia), Britain and its Western allies preferred Harry Kumbula to Kenneth Kaunda. In Lesotho, they preferred Jonathan Leabua to Ntsu Mokhehle, to the point of staging a coup d’état against him and stopping his being sworn in as the prime minister of Lesotho.
In Ghana, Britain never liked Kwame Nkrumah. It was only when the “Gold Coast” (now Ghana) became ungovernable that Britain conceded to the demands of Nkrumah’s CPP Party. In Kenya, Jomo Kenyatta of KANU was never the British colonial preference. They called him a Mau Mau leader, “a leader of darkness’”. In South Africa (Azania), Prof. Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe was never liked by the West and their agents. He was imprisoned on Robben Island without even a mockery of a trial and later banished until his death – through poisoning, his colleagues said. President Nkrumah was democratically elected in Ghana. But the Western countries (led again by America) used the CIA to overthrow his government.
Patrice Lumumba was legitimately elected the first prime minister of DRCongo. The Belgian and American governments were involved in his assassination and overthrow of his government. There is also a strong suspicion that white supremacists conspired, possibly with the collusion of Western powers, to assassinate Dag Hammarskjöld, the UN Secretary-General who was championing the Congo’s independence and defending its sovereignty.
Milton Obote of Uganda was equally overthrown by Britain under Edward Heath’s government. Idi Amin was installed and he murdered thousands of Ugandans. All these African leaders were overthrown or killed because they did not fit the “planned regime” strategy of the West. They were not trusted to look after neo-colonial economic interests at the expense of African economic interests.
This century Western leaders have come up with a “regime change” strategy. The excuse is that some African leaders had stayed too long in power. Well, in Britain, Prime Minister Robert Walpole ruled for 21 years. Elsewhere in Africa, Daniel Arap Moi ruled Kenya for 24 years. Hastings Banda ruled Malawi for 33 years. Mobuto Sese Seko ruled DRCongo for 37 years. Gnassingbe Eyadema of Togo was president for 41 years. Omar Bongo Ondima of Gabon equally ruled for 41 years. Hosni Mubarak ruled Egypt for nearly 30 years. Western leaders never pointed fingers at these leaders. They toed the line. They served western interests more than those of their own countries. In fact, Mobutu and Mubarak were very close allies of the USA. None of these leaders were ever asked to give in to democracy until their people drove them out of power.
It is an insult to intelligent Africans who recall that the countries that practised slavery, colonialism and racism and perpetrated atrocities against other humans, killing them and taking their lands and riches, are today posing as “teachers” of “democracy”, “legitimacy”, “good governance” and “rule of law”.
In 1994, the Americans and other Western countries showed up in a big way in apartheid South Africa. They applied their “planned regime” strategy. They picked from the liberation movements who was “extremist” and who was “moderate”. By “moderate” they meant leaders who would protect especially their foreign economic interests at the expense of their own African people.
Western countries, with few exceptions, supported the apartheid regime in South Africa. Relying on this support, Dr Gert Viljoen, the minister of constitutional affairs under President F. W. de Klerk, in 1990 made his government’s position very clear about who the South African regime would negotiate with.
“We want to change our approach,” he said. “But we would be negotiating even the name [of the country]. Many blacks call it Azania. I think there is no likelihood of coming to an agreement with them. They are the extreme Pan Africanist Congress [PAC]. The name Azania sounds a warning note of a break in history. In our thinking, a complete break in history would be unacceptable. We will have to provide some continuation of the past.”
Indeed, that “continuation of the past” is obvious in South Africa today. Whites, who are only 8.9%, according to the recent population census, still control 87% of the land to 13% allocated to the African indigenous majority, who make up a good 79.2% of the population.
This land dispossession is entrenched in section 25(7) of the “New South Africa” constitution, and they tell us this constitution is one of the most progressive in the world!
Explaining the reason why the apartheid regime should quickly negotiate with the “moderates”, The Star newspaper in Johannesburg reported at that time: “To the left of the ANC is the PAC, a bunch too radical for reasonable conversation… Unless the government talks to the ANC soon, and reaches an accommodation, the time will come when it would wish it had the ANC to talk to instead of the more radical organisations. Better by far to talk to the Mandelas, Tambos and Makatinis, conservative men all of them.”
During the 1994 elections, the American government heavily financed Mandela’s ANC to ensure that the De Klerk-Mandela “planned regime” succeeded. Stanley B. Greenberg and Frank Geer directed the ANC election campaign. These two men were President Clinton’s own pollster and image-maker respectively.
In his book, Dispatches from the War Room, Greenberg writes: “The Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) launched an anti-pass campaign… Close to 70 demonstrators in Sharpeville were massacred, putting the international limelight on the Pan Africanist Congress…
“The PAC was the only other party with standing in the anti-apartheid struggle, thus a majority of Africans viewed it favourably. The PAC boycotted the negotiations … and … advocated the expropriation of white land without compensation.”
The truth however is that the PAC had a long policy of equitable redistribution of land. It was the European colonial settlers who expropriated land from the Africans, and not the other way round.
Now it is nearly 20 years since the “negotiations” with the “moderates” ended in South Africa. But land and its riches are still the property of a European minority.
When the 1994 election results were announced, even The Times (of London) conceded that the election could not have been considered “free and fair’’. The newspaper reported: “There is agreement that there was widespread fraud and cheating.”
Bill Deeds of the Daily Telegraph (also of London) added his voice: “By our own electoral standard,” he wrote, “the conduct of South Africa’s general election and counting of votes has been deplorable.”
A senior official of the South African apartheid regime later corroborated that the 1994 elections had been “embarrassing and flawed”. He indicated that De Klerk and Mandela agreed that the elections had to be declared “free and fair” because the alternative would have been a political disaster. “We simply could not afford this thing to go down the tube. It would serve no purpose to cry foul.”
This makes it clear that if an African leader is not favoured by Western powers, he is a wrong leader for democracy. If he or she wins elections, they are illegitimate. If indeed, the leaders of Western countries are people of high morals and almost “infallible”, as they think they are, why did they not give even as much as a hint about the flawed elections in South Africa in 1994?
President Clinton’s two experts, Greenberg and Freez, were there. They had financed and conducted the elections. They knew what had happened!
The Western countries were aware of the majority African support for the Pan Africanist Congress and its undeniable strength in the run-up to the 1994 elections in South Africa. On 29 April 1990, Deon Delport of the Star newspaper in Johannesburg wrote: “A recent survey found among many Sowetan youngsters [that] the PAC is increasingly preferred to the ANC which is viewed as being promoted by the apartheid government.”
In the same article, Delport reported that wide support for the PAC had been found by the researcher Sue Lerena for McCann, a Johannesburg-based advertising firm. Lerena later said: “My own view was [that] we could end up like in Zimbabwe where whites were stunned and shocked by the defeat of Bishop Abel Muzorewa by Mr Robert Mugabe.”
The media further reported that: “The so-called main players are losing support, but where is it going to? The most important change over the past years has been the rise in support of the Pan Africanist Congress among blacks. The PAC is poised to emerge as the single most powerful electoral force … even though it is almost exclusively black.” (Work in progress magazine, 17 June 1993.)
After the assassination of Chris Hani, several newspapers reported on Clarence Makwetu, the president of the PAC and Nelson Mandela of the ANC. “Mr. Nelson Mandela, the icon of the black struggle against apartheid, was booed at a meeting in Soweto when he upset many in a crowd of around 30,000 people with a friendly reference to the ruling apartheid party.
One of the biggest cheers of the two-hour event came when Mr Clarence Makwetu, leader of the radical Pan Africanist Congress, strode into the packed stadium in the middle of Mr Mandela’s speech. “Mr Mandela was forced to pause as the crowd cheered and whistled for a beaming Makwetu who told them ‘we have come to a time when leaders run out of words’. The crowd rose to him and set off thunder flashes, while some ANC officials on the platform looked dismayed.”
So how did the PAC voters disappear on Election Day, 27 April 1994? Was there massive rigging in the presence of Clinton’s own men? What did they do about this? They never said a word after that!
Writing about the strength of the political parties in South Africa, Dr Vladamir Tickhomiov, the learned secretary of the Russian Academy of Science’s African Institute, confirmed prior to the 1994 South African elections, that: “The alliance of the ANC is weaker than that of other black organisations and movements. The ideology of Africanism and black awareness prevail among the majority of the politically active blacks.
“This was especially true when black organisations had the opportunity of leaving the underground and becoming legal.”
“It was not surprising when a German magazine, Geheim, stated: “The so-called independent electoral commission as well as the technical personnel handling the elections in South Africa was infiltrated by the National Intelligence Service (NIS) agents in places like Johannesburg, Western Cape, Pretoria, Port Elizabeth and Durban” (Geheim, 30 April 1994).
Zimbabwe is being attacked because it wants to control its own riches, which have been looted by Western companies for far too long. Africa must defend Zimbabwe. Africa cannot forever have its riches looted by imperialists through puppet leaders. Former slave traders have no credentials to qualify as champions of democracy and legitimacy in Africa.
(Dr Motsoko Pheko is author of several books, among which are ‘The Hidden Side of South African Politics’; and ‘Towards Africa’s Authentic Liberation’)
- See more at: www.newafricanmagazine.com/democracy-and-legitimacy-in-africa/#sthash.bpesxSxf.dpuf
........................................................................................................................................................
francis kwarteng 9 years ago
Kwadow,
I will prefer you take your time to read all the sources---including the CIA records I mentioned---and come back again. Please. That will help a lot.
You might want to add Richard D. Mahiney's "JFK: Ordeal in A ... read full comment
Kwadow,
I will prefer you take your time to read all the sources---including the CIA records I mentioned---and come back again. Please. That will help a lot.
You might want to add Richard D. Mahiney's "JFK: Ordeal in Africa" if you have not read it already. I forgot to mention it.
I usually don't rush to do things when they are that important. Take your time. Please.
Have a great weekend!
Thanks.
Kwadwo 9 years ago
I stated in one of my comments that Howard Bain, of the CIA , masterminded the overthrow of Nkrumah. In fact, he received an intelligence star and several promotions for the overthrow. I also conceded that Busia, Danguah and ... read full comment
I stated in one of my comments that Howard Bain, of the CIA , masterminded the overthrow of Nkrumah. In fact, he received an intelligence star and several promotions for the overthrow. I also conceded that Busia, Danguah and others collaborated with the CiA and other intelligence agencies to get the job done. My beef against Nkrumah was his failure to put Danguah and others before a court of law before locking them away. To me, this meant that he was a demagogue and a dictator willing to abuse the civil rights of others to achieve his political goals. I am against that and I cannot stand Rawlings because he executed people without due process. I cannot give Nkrumah a pass by a self serving argument that he had to do it because his life and was in danger? Did SMC11 under Akuffo and your uncle not give Rawlings a public trial?
Well, Mugabe is one of Nkrumah's legacies and I trust that he will unite Africa before he checks out. Long live Nkrumahism. Enjoy the super Bowl. I am picking Seattle.
By the way I took a lot of under graduate courses in intelligence gathering and I am well informed of what the CIA and other intelligence agencies have done throughout the world. Trust me. I don't need further reading assignments on this subject.
Pelicles 9 years ago
We can come up with our solution simply on paper but in practical, it is not doable. We are too corrupt. Corruption is what is keeping us at bay. We cannot develop without eliminating corruption and we do not need a rocket s ... read full comment
We can come up with our solution simply on paper but in practical, it is not doable. We are too corrupt. Corruption is what is keeping us at bay. We cannot develop without eliminating corruption and we do not need a rocket scientist to tell us that.
About couple of years ago, BBC announced that $300 billion had vanished from Nigeria's petroleum account and just imagine what that money can do.
We are always copying what the Europeans are doing and did they merge their countries from the onset or they developed their individual nations before merging?
Those with the radical approach to merge Africa from the onset are wrong because during that the time of OAU, some nations do not even understand what independent means and how do you tell these nation to hurry up and join a train that is traveling to a destination they have no idea?
Says Who 9 years ago
Why was it that Mugabe was feted by the advanced nations for years until he decided that some were unfairly dispossesed in his country and moved to redistribute resources by taking land mainly from a few well placed Zimbabwea ... read full comment
Why was it that Mugabe was feted by the advanced nations for years until he decided that some were unfairly dispossesed in his country and moved to redistribute resources by taking land mainly from a few well placed Zimbabweans?
Was it ok when large sections of the population were disposessed at the time that Mr Mugabe was been heralded and feted for years under a status quo which saw an unfair disposessiion of masses? Was he feted because he facilitatated a regime which saw a few individuals profit from the resources of his country?
I don't get it.
Nii 9 years ago
Lets face facts and be realistic. On a cost benefit analyses, Mugabe has destroyed his country.
Lets face facts and be realistic. On a cost benefit analyses, Mugabe has destroyed his country.
The mask 9 years ago
Mugabe is appropriate for many reasons
1. Mugabe lived in Ghana when Nkrumah, the father of African nationalim, was in power.
2. Mugabe has attended more OAU/AU African summits than any other African leader.
3. Mengi ... read full comment
Mugabe is appropriate for many reasons
1. Mugabe lived in Ghana when Nkrumah, the father of African nationalim, was in power.
2. Mugabe has attended more OAU/AU African summits than any other African leader.
3. Mengistu Haile Mariam the former leader of Africa's 2nd most successful socialist state lives with Mugabe in Zimbabwe.
4. Mugabe knows several topics: law, political science, history, international diplomacy etc
5. Mugabe is an African nationalist
We hope Mugabe would not betray Africa.
Prof Lungu 9 years ago
READ: "...Neither side, however, is talking about the real issue of economics—and freedom for Africans to raise themselves out of poverty, unshackled from State serfdom..."
OUR COMMENT: We are thinking it is more a case ... read full comment
READ: "...Neither side, however, is talking about the real issue of economics—and freedom for Africans to raise themselves out of poverty, unshackled from State serfdom..."
OUR COMMENT: We are thinking it is more a case of "Elite serfdom", than "State serfdom."
Our sense is, the old capitalist hyperbole about Adam Smith's invisible hand and personal greed never worked anywhere in the world, without state intervention (i.e., corporate welfare, support for specific classes of people, etc.).
In that sense, "protecting industries" was always a tactic, although they would in those case be 'run by corporate cronies'.
It is the elites that have failed the people. That includes those in the academy and professions, lawyers in particular.
And in Ghana, we have recently concluded that the elites at the academy at Legon, The University of Ghana, have been one of the biggest failures in Ghana, precisely in those areas IMANI has an interest in.
In Africa, Mugabe is now the biggest joke, and necessarily the biggest failure supported by elites from all shameful corners of Africa, including Mahama's Ghana.
francis kwarteng 9 years ago
Prof. Lungu,
Most of these corrupt African leaders have their strongest support in the West, not in Africa. Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni, and the late dictator of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi had their strongest support from the ... read full comment
Prof. Lungu,
Most of these corrupt African leaders have their strongest support in the West, not in Africa. Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni, and the late dictator of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi had their strongest support from the West.
Robert Mugabe would never be a pariah had he been a darling of the West. What didn’t Mobuto do? Let me give you two instances: The British scholar (and six other scholars from Africa) wrote an influential book "Zimbabwe's Land Reforms: Myths and Realities" to discredit the myths and lies perpetrated in the Western against the relative success of Mugabe's land reforems. Until this thoroughly-researched work came out, the Western press fabricated fat lies about Zimbabwea's land reforms. Now, when this leading British scholar came out with his findings the myths and lies quickly died away.
Second, even while America (and the rest of the West) had imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe the American government secretly went behind its sanctions (to negotiate with Robert Mugabe the "dictator") to buy US$10 MILLION worth of diamond from Zimbabwe. After the deal was sealed the Washington Post reported it briefly in one of its obscure pages (this happened close to the late 2000s). None of the major American papers bothered to report on this shameful deal!
What didn’t Felix Houphouët-Boigny do? What didn’t pw Bother do? What didn’t Omar Bongo do? What didn’t Augusto Pinochet do? What didn’t Saddam Hussein do?
What didn’t the Shah of Iran do? What didn’t Gnassingbe Eyadema do? What didn’t Forbes Burnham do? What didn’t “Papa Doc” Duvalier and “Baby Doc” Duvalier do? What didn’t Fulgencio Batista do? And several around! Their greatest support always came from the West. Who was Mobuto’s biggest supporter?
Charles Taylor, for instance, revealed to the world his close collaboration with the American CIA in the 80s at his international trial. Look at the funny excuse the Americans have given us about Taylor’s escape from an American prison. Nobody is even discussing his close yet illegal commercial ties with Rev. Pat Robertson (the same thing Rev. Robertson did with Mobuto, recalling that Rev. Pat Robertson successfully lobbied for Mobuto (and Taylor) in the US Congress.
The late Omar Bongo had to pay millions of US dollars just to court the friendship and protection of the Bush Administration.
Remember also that this came out during the lobbying controversy between Jack Abramoff and the American government, which sent Abramoff to prison (Read “JACK ABRAMOFF SCANDALS”; I believe you might be aware of this scandal and the many careers it destroyed; see what this scandal did to the political career of Tom Delay). Omar Bongo also bankrolled the presidencies of Jacque Chirac and others while his people went hungry!
Anyway your commentary on Adam Smith’s invisible hand and greed and state intervention is spot on.
The time has come for Africa to stand up together and fight with one voice the attempts by the metropolitan powers to dictate who is a legitimate leader in Africa and who is not. The history of such dictation shows the pursuit of Western self-interest at the cost of African nationalist interests, writes Dr Motsoko Pheko.
Zimbabwe is once again a wake-up call to all Africans who value their national sovereignty and control of their mineral wealth and other natural resources. The sustained attack on Zimbabwe is an economic war by Western countries on Africa.
These countries have a long history of a “planned regime”. If this fails, they resort to “regime change”. To Britain and America, and all their satellites, “democracy” and “legitimacy” is when their interests prevail over those of the African people.
It is reported that the American, British, Canadian and Australian governments do not believe that the recent election results in Zimbabwe represent the will of the people of Zimbabwe.
It is, therefore, important to point out that for all the long years when African states and the United Nations demanded economic sanctions against Ian Smith’s rebel colonial regime in Rhodesia and against apartheid South Africa, the European powers (led by the USA) opposed these sanctions. Britain’s Margaret Thatcher argued that sanctions would hurt “ordinary Rhodesians and black South Africans”.
This was all false. The countries of Western Europe had long had a “planned regime” strategy during the colonial days in Africa. This was put in place immediately they got a signal that Africans were determined to end colonialism and all forms of domination.
In Zimbabwe, the Western countries preferred Bishop Abel Muzorewa. Many attempts were made to assassinate Robert Mugabe even after the signing of the Lancaster House Agreement in 1979. In colonial Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia), Britain and its Western allies preferred Harry Kumbula to Kenneth Kaunda. In Lesotho, they preferred Jonathan Leabua to Ntsu Mokhehle, to the point of staging a coup d’état against him and stopping his being sworn in as the prime minister of Lesotho.
In Ghana, Britain never liked Kwame Nkrumah. It was only when the “Gold Coast” (now Ghana) became ungovernable that Britain conceded to the demands of Nkrumah’s CPP Party. In Kenya, Jomo Kenyatta of KANU was never the British colonial preference. They called him a Mau Mau leader, “a leader of darkness’”. In South Africa (Azania), Prof. Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe was never liked by the West and their agents. He was imprisoned on Robben Island without even a mockery of a trial and later banished until his death – through poisoning, his colleagues said. President Nkrumah was democratically elected in Ghana. But the Western countries (led again by America) used the CIA to overthrow his government.
Patrice Lumumba was legitimately elected the first prime minister of DRCongo. The Belgian and American governments were involved in his assassination and overthrow of his government. There is also a strong suspicion that white supremacists conspired, possibly with the collusion of Western powers, to assassinate Dag Hammarskjöld, the UN Secretary-General who was championing the Congo’s independence and defending its sovereignty.
Milton Obote of Uganda was equally overthrown by Britain under Edward Heath’s government. Idi Amin was installed and he murdered thousands of Ugandans. All these African leaders were overthrown or killed because they did not fit the “planned regime” strategy of the West. They were not trusted to look after neo-colonial economic interests at the expense of African economic interests.
This century Western leaders have come up with a “regime change” strategy. The excuse is that some African leaders had stayed too long in power. Well, in Britain, Prime Minister Robert Walpole ruled for 21 years. Elsewhere in Africa, Daniel Arap Moi ruled Kenya for 24 years. Hastings Banda ruled Malawi for 33 years. Mobuto Sese Seko ruled DRCongo for 37 years. Gnassingbe Eyadema of Togo was president for 41 years. Omar Bongo Ondima of Gabon equally ruled for 41 years. Hosni Mubarak ruled Egypt for nearly 30 years. Western leaders never pointed fingers at these leaders. They toed the line. They served western interests more than those of their own countries. In fact, Mobutu and Mubarak were very close allies of the USA. None of these leaders were ever asked to give in to democracy until their people drove them out of power.
It is an insult to intelligent Africans who recall that the countries that practised slavery, colonialism and racism and perpetrated atrocities against other humans, killing them and taking their lands and riches, are today posing as “teachers” of “democracy”, “legitimacy”, “good governance” and “rule of law”.
In 1994, the Americans and other Western countries showed up in a big way in apartheid South Africa. They applied their “planned regime” strategy. They picked from the liberation movements who was “extremist” and who was “moderate”. By “moderate” they meant leaders who would protect especially their foreign economic interests at the expense of their own African people.
Western countries, with few exceptions, supported the apartheid regime in South Africa. Relying on this support, Dr Gert Viljoen, the minister of constitutional affairs under President F. W. de Klerk, in 1990 made his government’s position very clear about who the South African regime would negotiate with.
“We want to change our approach,” he said. “But we would be negotiating even the name [of the country]. Many blacks call it Azania. I think there is no likelihood of coming to an agreement with them. They are the extreme Pan Africanist Congress [PAC]. The name Azania sounds a warning note of a break in history. In our thinking, a complete break in history would be unacceptable. We will have to provide some continuation of the past.”
Indeed, that “continuation of the past” is obvious in South Africa today. Whites, who are only 8.9%, according to the recent population census, still control 87% of the land to 13% allocated to the African indigenous majority, who make up a good 79.2% of the population.
This land dispossession is entrenched in section 25(7) of the “New South Africa” constitution, and they tell us this constitution is one of the most progressive in the world!
Explaining the reason why the apartheid regime should quickly negotiate with the “moderates”, The Star newspaper in Johannesburg reported at that time: “To the left of the ANC is the PAC, a bunch too radical for reasonable conversation… Unless the government talks to the ANC soon, and reaches an accommodation, the time will come when it would wish it had the ANC to talk to instead of the more radical organisations. Better by far to talk to the Mandelas, Tambos and Makatinis, conservative men all of them.”
During the 1994 elections, the American government heavily financed Mandela’s ANC to ensure that the De Klerk-Mandela “planned regime” succeeded. Stanley B. Greenberg and Frank Geer directed the ANC election campaign. These two men were President Clinton’s own pollster and image-maker respectively.
In his book, Dispatches from the War Room, Greenberg writes: “The Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) launched an anti-pass campaign… Close to 70 demonstrators in Sharpeville were massacred, putting the international limelight on the Pan Africanist Congress…
“The PAC was the only other party with standing in the anti-apartheid struggle, thus a majority of Africans viewed it favourably. The PAC boycotted the negotiations … and … advocated the expropriation of white land without compensation.”
The truth however is that the PAC had a long policy of equitable redistribution of land. It was the European colonial settlers who expropriated land from the Africans, and not the other way round.
Now it is nearly 20 years since the “negotiations” with the “moderates” ended in South Africa. But land and its riches are still the property of a European minority.
When the 1994 election results were announced, even The Times (of London) conceded that the election could not have been considered “free and fair’’. The newspaper reported: “There is agreement that there was widespread fraud and cheating.”
Bill Deeds of the Daily Telegraph (also of London) added his voice: “By our own electoral standard,” he wrote, “the conduct of South Africa’s general election and counting of votes has been deplorable.”
A senior official of the South African apartheid regime later corroborated that the 1994 elections had been “embarrassing and flawed”. He indicated that De Klerk and Mandela agreed that the elections had to be declared “free and fair” because the alternative would have been a political disaster. “We simply could not afford this thing to go down the tube. It would serve no purpose to cry foul.”
This makes it clear that if an African leader is not favoured by Western powers, he is a wrong leader for democracy. If he or she wins elections, they are illegitimate. If indeed, the leaders of Western countries are people of high morals and almost “infallible”, as they think they are, why did they not give even as much as a hint about the flawed elections in South Africa in 1994?
President Clinton’s two experts, Greenberg and Freez, were there. They had financed and conducted the elections. They knew what had happened!
The Western countries were aware of the majority African support for the Pan Africanist Congress and its undeniable strength in the run-up to the 1994 elections in South Africa. On 29 April 1990, Deon Delport of the Star newspaper in Johannesburg wrote: “A recent survey found among many Sowetan youngsters [that] the PAC is increasingly preferred to the ANC which is viewed as being promoted by the apartheid government.”
In the same article, Delport reported that wide support for the PAC had been found by the researcher Sue Lerena for McCann, a Johannesburg-based advertising firm. Lerena later said: “My own view was [that] we could end up like in Zimbabwe where whites were stunned and shocked by the defeat of Bishop Abel Muzorewa by Mr Robert Mugabe.”
The media further reported that: “The so-called main players are losing support, but where is it going to? The most important change over the past years has been the rise in support of the Pan Africanist Congress among blacks. The PAC is poised to emerge as the single most powerful electoral force … even though it is almost exclusively black.” (Work in progress magazine, 17 June 1993.)
After the assassination of Chris Hani, several newspapers reported on Clarence Makwetu, the president of the PAC and Nelson Mandela of the ANC. “Mr. Nelson Mandela, the icon of the black struggle against apartheid, was booed at a meeting in Soweto when he upset many in a crowd of around 30,000 people with a friendly reference to the ruling apartheid party.
One of the biggest cheers of the two-hour event came when Mr Clarence Makwetu, leader of the radical Pan Africanist Congress, strode into the packed stadium in the middle of Mr Mandela’s speech. “Mr Mandela was forced to pause as the crowd cheered and whistled for a beaming Makwetu who told them ‘we have come to a time when leaders run out of words’. The crowd rose to him and set off thunder flashes, while some ANC officials on the platform looked dismayed.”
So how did the PAC voters disappear on Election Day, 27 April 1994? Was there massive rigging in the presence of Clinton’s own men? What did they do about this? They never said a word after that!
Writing about the strength of the political parties in South Africa, Dr Vladamir Tickhomiov, the learned secretary of the Russian Academy of Science’s African Institute, confirmed prior to the 1994 South African elections, that: “The alliance of the ANC is weaker than that of other black organisations and movements. The ideology of Africanism and black awareness prevail among the majority of the politically active blacks.
“This was especially true when black organisations had the opportunity of leaving the underground and becoming legal.”
“It was not surprising when a German magazine, Geheim, stated: “The so-called independent electoral commission as well as the technical personnel handling the elections in South Africa was infiltrated by the National Intelligence Service (NIS) agents in places like Johannesburg, Western Cape, Pretoria, Port Elizabeth and Durban” (Geheim, 30 April 1994).
Zimbabwe is being attacked because it wants to control its own riches, which have been looted by Western companies for far too long. Africa must defend Zimbabwe. Africa cannot forever have its riches looted by imperialists through puppet leaders. Former slave traders have no credentials to qualify as champions of democracy and legitimacy in Africa.
(Dr Motsoko Pheko is author of several books, among which are ‘The Hidden Side of South African Politics’; and ‘Towards Africa’s Authentic Liberation’)
- See more at: www.newafricanmagazine.com/democracy-and-legitimacy-in-africa/#sthash.bpesxSxf.dpuf
........................................................................................................................................................
Prof Lungu 9 years ago
We know African leaders have been co-opted, or extinguished, by the West and other nations in other spheres, for their own strategic interests.
But good intentions can become stale. And Mugabe is of that sort.
You do n ... read full comment
We know African leaders have been co-opted, or extinguished, by the West and other nations in other spheres, for their own strategic interests.
But good intentions can become stale. And Mugabe is of that sort.
You do not set out to control your own "riches" and more that 2 generations later, still cling to power as if you are the Country, and the Country is You!.
If only Mugabe and so many of the these so-called leaders were only 50% of Mandela!
Mensah 9 years ago
That idiot is so anti Western, he will blame all Africans problems on the west,and he refuses to accept that we Africans are the causes of our own misery. I can bet he is one of the corrupt Politicians stealing from the poor ... read full comment
That idiot is so anti Western, he will blame all Africans problems on the west,and he refuses to accept that we Africans are the causes of our own misery. I can bet he is one of the corrupt Politicians stealing from the poor in Ghana while all the time espousing socialism in his propaganda effusions.
francis kwarteng 9 years ago
Mensah,
Prof. Lungu never deflated anyone.
What has Prof. Lungu's statment about Mandela got to do with my comments to him? NOTHING. Where in my comments did I say or imply Mandela was better/worse than African leaders ... read full comment
Mensah,
Prof. Lungu never deflated anyone.
What has Prof. Lungu's statment about Mandela got to do with my comments to him? NOTHING. Where in my comments did I say or imply Mandela was better/worse than African leaders, or vice versa?
How did you read him and me? His comments about Nelson Mandela has NOTHING to do with my comments to Prof. Lungu. Go back and read my comments to him again and re-read his. AGAIN PROF. LUNGU'S COMMENTS ABOUT MANDELA HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY COMMENTS TO HIM.
THAT ASIDE, I AM NOT ANTI-WESTERN. I LIKE TO STATE THE FACTS AS THEY ARE. GET AL GORE'S SET OF BOOKS AND READ THEM THOROUGHLY. ONCE YOU ARE DONE, YOU WILL COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION THAT AL GORE IS ALSO ANT-WESTERN.
THERE ARE SO MANY ORDINARY AMERICAN, AMERICAN PROFESSORS AND SENATORS AND WRITERS WHO SHARE MY OPINIONS ABOUT THE WORLD. READ AND READ AND READ AND WATCH DEMOCRACY NOW AND READ AND READ AND READ AND YOU WILL REALIZE THAT THERE ARE MILLIONS AROUND THE WORLD INCLUDING WESTERNERS WHO SHARE THE SAME VIEWS AS MINE.
FINALLY, PROF. LUNGU HAS NOT DEFLATED ANYONE, UNLESS YOU GROSSLY MISREAD MY COMMENTS TO HIM. GO BACK AND READ MT COMMENTS AGAIN. LET ME KNOW WHERE I IMPLIED OR EXCPLICITLY SAID WHAT YOU THINK PROF. LUNGU IS SAYING.
NO SENTIMENTS PLEASE. JUST STATE THE FACTS.
THANKS.
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 9 years ago
The Asian Tigers were successful because industrialization was led by the state and at the expense of democracy in those days. Again, these societies are disciplined, unlike Ghana or Africa where our people are indisciplined ... read full comment
The Asian Tigers were successful because industrialization was led by the state and at the expense of democracy in those days. Again, these societies are disciplined, unlike Ghana or Africa where our people are indisciplined and lawless. In Malaysia one cannot even throw chewing gum on the street but in Ghana a man driving BMW could stop on the street and openly urinate.
No state has developed without the lead by state. Even mighty capitalists of USA and UK's development were led by state. FDR used public funds to support and awards contracts to corporations as part of the New Deal. In the UK most of the leading industries were state owned until they were privatised after the foundation had been laid by the state.
The appointment or election of Mugabe as AU Chairman is a manifestation of how African leaders have become dinosaurs. I felt sick when I read about President Mahama visiting Gambia to solidarise with that brutal dictator and murderer, Yahaya Jammeh.
YAW 9 years ago
Spot on! IMANI..would not have existed in Indonesia or Malaysia under their respective leaders watch.Trade Unions,Free Press or Freedom of Association were all no-go areas.Sometimes,I wonder whether these guys in Ghana apprec ... read full comment
Spot on! IMANI..would not have existed in Indonesia or Malaysia under their respective leaders watch.Trade Unions,Free Press or Freedom of Association were all no-go areas.Sometimes,I wonder whether these guys in Ghana appreciate dictatorship.The so-called Asian miracle have a far darker and sinister side.Political repression,massive corruption,gargantuan environmental destruction coupled with labour exploitation seems to escape the fertile minds of the IMANI GROUP.
francis kwarteng 9 years ago
Dear Brother Kofi Ata,
Spot on.
This exactly what I have been this past few days in my articles.
Have a great week.
Dear Brother Kofi Ata,
Spot on.
This exactly what I have been this past few days in my articles.
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order closing Congress, effective immediately.
The President said that the move would dramatically increase the efficiency of the federal government, noting how much he had accomplished since he stopped working with Congress in November.
Additionally, he said, the elimination of Congress would result in annual savings of more than five billion dollars, which Obama said would be refunded to American taxpayers.
Acknowledging that “some sticklers” would argue that the Constitution calls for three branches of government, the President said, “All this order does is reduce that number by one.”
The initial public reaction to the President’s decision appeared to be overwhelmingly positive, as news of the executive order sent his approval rating soaring to seventy-nine percent.
Asked by reporters if he had any message for members of Congress, the President said, “I got it from here.”
A perfectly positioned and articulated hoax of a headline/story, of course!
ITEM: Astute minds in America and all over the world who have a fairly elementary view of world history understand that the American Republican ... read full comment
A perfectly positioned and articulated hoax of a headline/story, of course!
ITEM: Astute minds in America and all over the world who have a fairly elementary view of world history understand that the American Republican Party under current leadership is not "Conservative".
More than that, racism is deeply embedded in many in the ranks, including their leaders, which itself, has little to do with "economics".
Then, there are others!
But these are singularly against the "Republicans' professed belief in the "free market economy."
How else could they reject their own brand of "Affordable Healthcare" for the US? Then vote for subsidies for Oil companies, year after year, even as the highways are crumbling?
ITEM: To cut to the chase, none of their ideas about how to grow the economy has panned out since Reagan. The economy never trickles down. It is the reverse! And Merkel's Europe's, with starving consumer demand for goods, is still suffering from that "brand" of economic delusion.
Today's American Republican Party would never have supported, let alone build, the Union Stations, Grand Central Stations, Interstate systems, the Marshall Plan for Merkel's "old" Europe that plunged the World into a second "World War," etc.
So here is from Bill Maher, not as much a philosopher, if you want to argue, but as an acute/critical observer of the world, on the role of the "State" versus the "Elites":
READ: Bill Maher Says Socialism Created America's Middle Class.
"....In the latest "Real Time with Bill Maher," the host sounded off on politicians for repeatedly talking about middle-class economics, saying, "No one is telling the truth."
"The large, thriving middle class that America used to have didn't just appear out of the blue. It was created using an economic tool called socialism," said Maher. The talk show host went on to explain that heavy taxation and redistribution of wealth after WWII led to America's middle-class success. "Yes, for a brief, shining moment, we were Finland," he joked.
As demonstrated by his comments on Islam and "American Sniper," Maher is not known to shy away from controversy. On socialism, he added, "We can debate whether that's a good thing or a bad thing to go back to, but what is beyond debate is that, that is what happened."
"Real Time with Bill Maher" airs Friday at 10:00 p.m. ET on HBO...."
Africa does not need economic freedom before it can unite.A united Africa can easily formulate the framework within it can move forward economically.A united Africa can easily harness Africa's enormous resources for the rapi ... read full comment
Africa does not need economic freedom before it can unite.A united Africa can easily formulate the framework within it can move forward economically.A united Africa can easily harness Africa's enormous resources for the rapid economic development needed to lift africans out of poverty.
Gyamfi 9 years ago
If dramani mahama can be president of Nkrumah's Ghana, anybody can lead AFRICAN union. By the way Mugabe is far far far better a leader than mahama. His policies are too AFRICAN and antagonistic to the west, colonialists wher ... read full comment
If dramani mahama can be president of Nkrumah's Ghana, anybody can lead AFRICAN union. By the way Mugabe is far far far better a leader than mahama. His policies are too AFRICAN and antagonistic to the west, colonialists whereas mahama is just useless.
francis kwarteng 9 years ago
Please see the piece in the New Yorker.
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an exe ... read full comment
Please see the piece in the New Yorker.
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order closing Congress, effective immediately.
The President said that the move would dramatically increase the efficiency of the federal government, noting how much he had accomplished since he stopped working with Congress in November.
Additionally, he said, the elimination of Congress would result in annual savings of more than five billion dollars, which Obama said would be refunded to American taxpayers.
Acknowledging that “some sticklers” would argue that the Constitution calls for three branches of government, the President said, “All this order does is reduce that number by one.”
The initial public reaction to the President’s decision appeared to be overwhelmingly positive, as news of the executive order sent his approval rating soaring to seventy-nine percent.
Asked by reporters if he had any message for members of Congress, the President said, “I got it from here.”
GH-Atheist 9 years ago
The New Yorker article is not meant to be taken as a matter of fact. It's satire.
The New Yorker article is not meant to be taken as a matter of fact. It's satire.
Prof Lungu 9 years ago
A perfectly articulated, positioned, hoax!
A perfectly articulated, positioned, hoax!
Paul 9 years ago
Clearly Franklin Cudjoe is so ignorant, he has not made any effort to study Robert Mugabe. For his information, Mugabe is more intelligent, practical and has made more impact in his country and in Africa than Cudjoe would eve ... read full comment
Clearly Franklin Cudjoe is so ignorant, he has not made any effort to study Robert Mugabe. For his information, Mugabe is more intelligent, practical and has made more impact in his country and in Africa than Cudjoe would ever make in his entire life.
The western narrative of African leaders can make our naive and ignorant noise makers like Cudjoe blind to facts and realities.
Did Cudjoe by any chance listen to the Mugabe speech at the lat UN General Assembly? It was one of the best practical, sensible and intelligent speeches of all the speeches made at the last UNGA. And to say that this is coming from a 90 year old who is still active is all the more remarkable.
I personally believe Mugabe has stayed on too long, but I am not one of those who follow the west blindly with their view and judgment on our African leaders. What Zimbabwe needs is proper succession planning and my worry is that Mrs Mugabe is now the problem for Zimbabwe, not Robert Mugabe.
The Africa Union lacks strong and tried leadership such as we see in Mugabe and that is really sad. But Franklin should try and do his home work well before commenting on others or criticising especially more accomplished leaders such as Mugabe.
GH-Atheist 9 years ago
The New Yorker article Francis Kwarteng keeps posting is satire and not an actual news story.
I don't know what point Francis is trying to make but Obama has not signed an executive order closing congress - he can't do tha ... read full comment
The New Yorker article Francis Kwarteng keeps posting is satire and not an actual news story.
I don't know what point Francis is trying to make but Obama has not signed an executive order closing congress - he can't do that.
Please go to www(.)whitehouse(.)gov to see all real executive orders signed.
freddie 9 years ago
Africa union under mogabe? It's another hopeless union anyway so no wonder.
Africa union under mogabe? It's another hopeless union anyway so no wonder.
This is my beef with Nkrumaism. Get these inept governments off our backs and the individuals can build a better lives for themselves.
It is a disaster!
Author: Kafui Ama
Date: 2009-07-23 01:44:06
Please be patient and read this to the end.
By Craig Murray, former Deputy British High Commisssioner to Ghana | Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
... It was Novembe ...
read full comment
Kwadwo,
Nkrumahism also produced/influenced the likes of Nelson Mandela and several others. Nkrumahism also influenced Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Toure) and greatly impacted the Civil Rig ...
read full comment
Francis, I continue to avoid your lair but since none of those Nkrumah apologists have been able to define the theory of "Nkrumaism" to me and you are a proponent of this idealism, maybe you can help me understand what Nkruma ...
read full comment
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order closing Congress, effective im ...
read full comment
Another Nkrumah believer who can't even define the meaning of Nkrumaish.
You are wrong trying to get credit for Nkrumaism for Martin Luther King's achievement. Whilst Nkrumah and his adherents were agitating for confrontation with Colonial masters to achieve independence, Martin Luther King was pr ...
read full comment
You know the how the fetus of Nkrumah was formed in his mother's womb till he became our first leader. My question to you is, who was his vice president when he was our president? Nkrumah is being praised as if he did everyt ...
read full comment
From the New Yorker (For you Pellicles)
........................................................................................................................................................
TITLE: Obama Signs Executi ...
read full comment
Kwadwo,
Most of these corrupt African leaders have their strongest support in the West, not in Africa. Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni, and the late dictator of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi had their strongest support from the West. ...
read full comment
Kwadow,
I will prefer you take your time to read all the sources---including the CIA records I mentioned---and come back again. Please. That will help a lot.
You might want to add Richard D. Mahiney's "JFK: Ordeal in A ...
read full comment
I stated in one of my comments that Howard Bain, of the CIA , masterminded the overthrow of Nkrumah. In fact, he received an intelligence star and several promotions for the overthrow. I also conceded that Busia, Danguah and ...
read full comment
We can come up with our solution simply on paper but in practical, it is not doable. We are too corrupt. Corruption is what is keeping us at bay. We cannot develop without eliminating corruption and we do not need a rocket s ...
read full comment
Why was it that Mugabe was feted by the advanced nations for years until he decided that some were unfairly dispossesed in his country and moved to redistribute resources by taking land mainly from a few well placed Zimbabwea ...
read full comment
Lets face facts and be realistic. On a cost benefit analyses, Mugabe has destroyed his country.
Mugabe is appropriate for many reasons
1. Mugabe lived in Ghana when Nkrumah, the father of African nationalim, was in power.
2. Mugabe has attended more OAU/AU African summits than any other African leader.
3. Mengi ...
read full comment
READ: "...Neither side, however, is talking about the real issue of economics—and freedom for Africans to raise themselves out of poverty, unshackled from State serfdom..."
OUR COMMENT: We are thinking it is more a case ...
read full comment
Prof. Lungu,
Most of these corrupt African leaders have their strongest support in the West, not in Africa. Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni, and the late dictator of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi had their strongest support from the ...
read full comment
We know African leaders have been co-opted, or extinguished, by the West and other nations in other spheres, for their own strategic interests.
But good intentions can become stale. And Mugabe is of that sort.
You do n ...
read full comment
That idiot is so anti Western, he will blame all Africans problems on the west,and he refuses to accept that we Africans are the causes of our own misery. I can bet he is one of the corrupt Politicians stealing from the poor ...
read full comment
Mensah,
Prof. Lungu never deflated anyone.
What has Prof. Lungu's statment about Mandela got to do with my comments to him? NOTHING. Where in my comments did I say or imply Mandela was better/worse than African leaders ...
read full comment
The Asian Tigers were successful because industrialization was led by the state and at the expense of democracy in those days. Again, these societies are disciplined, unlike Ghana or Africa where our people are indisciplined ...
read full comment
Spot on! IMANI..would not have existed in Indonesia or Malaysia under their respective leaders watch.Trade Unions,Free Press or Freedom of Association were all no-go areas.Sometimes,I wonder whether these guys in Ghana apprec ...
read full comment
Dear Brother Kofi Ata,
Spot on.
This exactly what I have been this past few days in my articles.
Have a great week.
From the New Yorker
........................................................................................................................................................
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Con ...
read full comment
A perfectly positioned and articulated hoax of a headline/story, of course!
ITEM: Astute minds in America and all over the world who have a fairly elementary view of world history understand that the American Republican ...
read full comment
Africa does not need economic freedom before it can unite.A united Africa can easily formulate the framework within it can move forward economically.A united Africa can easily harness Africa's enormous resources for the rapi ...
read full comment
If dramani mahama can be president of Nkrumah's Ghana, anybody can lead AFRICAN union. By the way Mugabe is far far far better a leader than mahama. His policies are too AFRICAN and antagonistic to the west, colonialists wher ...
read full comment
Please see the piece in the New Yorker.
TITLE: Obama Signs Executive Order Closing Congress
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic Oval Office ceremony on Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an exe ...
read full comment
The New Yorker article is not meant to be taken as a matter of fact. It's satire.
A perfectly articulated, positioned, hoax!
Clearly Franklin Cudjoe is so ignorant, he has not made any effort to study Robert Mugabe. For his information, Mugabe is more intelligent, practical and has made more impact in his country and in Africa than Cudjoe would eve ...
read full comment
The New Yorker article Francis Kwarteng keeps posting is satire and not an actual news story.
I don't know what point Francis is trying to make but Obama has not signed an executive order closing congress - he can't do tha ...
read full comment
Africa union under mogabe? It's another hopeless union anyway so no wonder.