Can Malawi engage the gear of good governance a bit more? Would this unlock Malawi’s potential of delivering to its people desirable, of-quality, sustainable livelihoods? Can Malawians engage a higher gear of demanding accountability with all the whole marks of answerability and enforceability from their politicians? And can politicians take on the voice of Malawians as they formulate, articulate and implement policies?
THE MALAWI CONTEXT
Malawi is a small country in the Southern part of Africa, bordered by Zambia in the West and North-west, Mozambique in the South, South-west and South-East and Tanzania in the North. It was colonized by the British. The country gained independence in 1964 and became a Republic in 1966. In 1971, Dr Hastings Kamuzu Banda, the then President declared himself the Life President of the country in himself becoming the “government and the law.” Throughout his presidency with the help of a single viable political party at the time, the Malawi Congress Party, Banda held an iron grip on Malawi. It was such a tight-fisted grip that any change to ways of governing, let alone democratic changes, looked a farfetched far-cry. However, in the late 1980s pressure started mounting on Banda and his political party to change course. Of particular concern was his repressive approach to governance and there were reports of atrocious abuses of human rights especially among the people Banda considered political dissidents. In March 1992, the Catholic Bishops in Malawi issued a Pastoral letter entitled “living our faith” in which they directly confronted the Banda regime and denounced the human rights abuses. This caused an uproar and the momentum to rid Malawi of Banda’s brutal rule. In the same year, a civil rights activist, Chakufwa Chihana announced that he was returning to Malawi, after several years in a Banda-imposed-exile to help aid the removal of Banda from power. The country was aflame with the wind of change that it was not possible for Banda to hold on and in 1993 a referendum was called for the Malawian people to choose between remaining under one party rule and political pluralism; Malawians chose political pluralism in the name of Democracy and the first multi-party elections were conducted in 1994 ushering into power Bakilli Muluzi. The change was that quick and substantially smooth and Stephen Brown 2000, writing for Africa Files, rightly says “no one could have predicted that within a short period of time, between 1992 and 1994, the brutal dictatorship would peacefully transfer power to a democratically elected opposition party, a process hailed as a model democratic transition”
POLITICAL GOVERNANCE
Political governance, let alone good political governance, is a very contentious term. It can mean different things in different settings. What seems universally agreed upon though is that governance is vital for development to occur to a people in a given setting.
Governance has been spoken about by many – people, organizations, institutions and governments themselves; it is a word, or rather a concept that you find in many documents and schools of thought in today’s development rhetoric. Kofi Anan, for example had this to say in 1998 about governance when he was UN’s Secretary General, “Good governance is perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development.” The Economist, in 1999 intimated that “of all the ills that kill the poor, none is as lethal as bad government.” Not willing to be left behind in making a case about governance, the Commission for Africa, 2005 commented that “the issue of good governance and capacity building is what we believe lies at the core of all of Africa’s problems.” And the United Nations, through its Millennium Project, seems to wrap it up as they say “there is no excuse for any country, no matter how poor, to abuse its citizens, deny them equal protection of the law or leave them victims of corruption, mismanagement or economic irrationality” (UN Millennium Project, 2005). But quite rightly, ODI 2006 cautions as it intimates that governance has to be contextualised if its meaning and its appeal including measurement are to be appreciated better.
There are principles of governance that are applicable and should be embarked on universally. The World Bank identifies six dimensions of governance which can be measured in different settings using different indicators. They include: Voice and accountability, Political stability and absence of violence, Government effectiveness, Regulatory quality, Rule of Law and Control of Corruption (World Bank, 2007).
As the concept of governance will be examined under the lens of the role it plays on sustainable livelihoods (SL), it is important to make mention of sustainable livelihoods as well. SL is about a people meeting their life’s needs not only today, but tomorrow as well and for the rest of their lives. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) describes SL as “being concerned with peoples capacities to generate and maintain their means of living enhance their well-being and that of future generations” (http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/sei/sustainability/livelihoods/def.html)
Both concepts, good governance and sustainable livelihoods, affect the people. There has to be a way for the people to interact with both and ably articulate their needs and aspirations so that they benefit from both. All the literature and data synthesised in this research will be appropriated to Malawi and in settings like Malawi’s, one of the poorest countries in the world, the people’s interaction between the political governance arena and their abilities to create sustainable livelihoods should be even more important. Institutions, policies and structures should be inextricably linked to the will of the people and this calls for their “voice” to be heard and those that take “responsibility” for political leadership to be “accountable” on the decisions or omissions that they take as they discharge the people given-authority. On the whole, political leadership should be about delivery of services to the people and facilitating people’s participation in creating strategies for sustainable livelihoods.
To unravel what sustainable livelihoods really means, the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA), succinctly frame-worked by the Department for International Development (DFID) of the United Kingdom will be utilized. There is the context in which People determine their livelihoods and this ha been referred to as the vulnerability context and within this the shocks, trends and seasonaity of what defines people’s livelihoods are considered. Further to this there is what has been described as Livelihood Assets – the Human, social, physical, financial and natural capital and the access one has to these greatly influences the livelihood outcomes in a given set of a population. Not less important to all this is what has been called the “transforming structures and processes which include levels of government, involvement of the private sector etc for structures and laws, policies, culture, institutions etc for processes. When all this is considered, people will embark on livelihood strategies which at he end of it all determine people’s livelihood outcomes (DFID, 1999).
It is at the point of “transforming structures and processes” that issues of governance pose potential for improving or limiting people’s accesses to assets and choice of strategies that people choose to employ to better their livelihood outcomes. People (the citizenry) should be able to influence what happens at this level and demand that their voice be taken into account as policies are instituted. Politicians on the other hand should listen to the voice of the people and they (politicians) should be willing to be accountable for the decisions they take or omit in creating an enabling environment for people to pursue strategies of achieving desirable and acceptable livelihood outcomes. The World Bank, 2004, has described this form of accountability as possessing the quality of answerability and enforceability .
Despite democratization and going to the polls every five-years, Malawi has not made any significant gains in as far as improving the quality of life of the general population is concerned. Brown, 2000 puts it more succinctly as he says “Malawi faces the major challenge of building new democratic institutions and practices and even a democratic culture in a context of enduring neopatrimonialism, widespread poverty , creating such related problems as low levels of literacy, education and health, continued economic stagnation, weak civic organizations, limited participation and accountability and profit-seeking politicians.” This has led the population to be totally indifferent from democratization as conditions of living have not changed post-Banda and political pluralism is associated with food shortages, high commodity process, badly-shaped infrastructure. (Brown, 2000). Simply put peoples livelihoods have remained the same or become worse as livelihood assets are hard to access in the backdrop of economic deficiencies and rife with political inadequacies. Good governance, this research wants to assert, can do it for Malawians using the sustainable livelihoods approach.
CONCLUSION
Every human being desires livelihoods that are of quality and sustainable. An enabling environment to pursue desirable levels of livelihood outcomes needs to be created and good political governance is one concept that can facilitate the creation of that environment. This research will be intent at examining the governance concept and its role in bringing about sustainable livelihoods. This will be appropriated to Malawi and suggestions made on how Malawi can benefit from the concept of good governance. Voice and accountability will be a dimension of governance that will be examined in detail in this research. It is expected that some policy recommendations will be made at the end of the research.
REFERENCES
Brown, S. (2000). The Trouble with democracy. Africa Files [Online] Available on http://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=3640 [Accessed on 21/02/2008].
Department for International Development (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. [Online} Available on www.livelihoods.org/info/guidance_sheets_rtfs/Sect2.rtf [Accessed on 28/02/2008]
International Institute for Sustainable Development (2001): Implementing Sustainability – Sustainable livelihoods: Stockholm Environmental Institute [Online] Available on http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/sei/sustainability/livelihoods/def.html [Accessed on 08/03/2008].
Overseas Development Institute (2006). Briefing Paper: Governance, Development and Aid effectiveness: A quick guide to complex relationships. [Online] Available on http://www.odi.org.uk/Publications/briefing/bp_mar06_governance.pdf [Accessed on 07/03/2008]
World Bank (2004). World Development Report: Making services work for the poor. Oxford University Press. Washington.
World Bank (2004). Governance and Anti-corruption. [Online] Available on http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/WBI/EXTWBIGOVANTCOR/0,,menuPK:1740542~pagePK:64168427~piPK:64168435~theSitePK:1740530,00.html [Accessed on 10th March 2008].
World Bank (2008). Worldwide Governance Indicators: 1996 – 2006. [Online] Available on http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/WBI/EXTWBIGOVANTCOR/0,,contentMDK:20771165~menuPK:1866365~pagePK:64168445~piPK:64168309~theSitePK:1740530,00.html [Accessed on 03/03/2008].
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008
Fertilizer subsidies in Malawi: An HIV/AIDS Prevention and management strategy?
Malawi is one of the poorest countries in the world and its economy is agrarian. More than half of the population survives on smallholder farming and lives in poverty and a good section of that is described as ultra poor. Chinsinga and O’brien, 2008 agree as they say “the economic reality is grim, 52% of the population are poor defined as per capita income of less than US$0.40/day. At least 22% live on less than US$0.26/day and are classified as ultra poor.”
Agricultural production is the sole source of food provision to the population. While tobacco, coffee and tea are the main cash crops, maize is the crop that is regarded as “food” for many Malawian families. However, the agricultural sector is vulnerable to so many shocks including adverse weather and soil nutrient depletion and these render the sector, the mainstay of the economy and food provision for the country, immensely unreliable at times. The rainy season, running from about November to March supports and sustains only one growing season (Chinsinga and O’Brien, 2008). Any individual, family or community coming out of that growing season with inadequate maize or any of the cash crops is left open to hunger and starvation as there is no tangible and stable social welfare system in the country, considering its small and low economic base, to come in handy for the people in times of lean harvests. Livelihoods stagger when this happens; and Malawi has had its fair share of chronic hunger stretching across all the three governments Malawi has had since independence in 1964. Adverse weather conditions and the ever-skyrocketing prices of inorganic fertilizers have played their role in this.
MALAWI, AND THE HIV, AIDS-POVERTY CYCLE.
Malawi is a small country in the sub-Saharan region of the vast continent of Africa. This region has the greatest burden of disease in the world, even more so the burden of HIV and AIDS. Malawi alone is home to close to one million people living with HIV and AIDS; representing, of the 13,000,000+ people in Malawi, 14.1% of those aged between 15 and 49 (UNAIDS, 2008).
As can be deduced from this, the impact of HIV on any sector in Malawi is devastating and agriculture has not been spared. It can be argued that the loss of labour and manpower, owing to HIV, is considerably significant so as to stand independently as a factor in the low food and cash crop production in Malawi at present. Additively, the low economic growth of the country, the inability to respond to shocks of different sorts because of poverty and the constant state of food-insecurity have a significant bearing on the wild-fire-like spread of HIV – and these factors, in a compounding fashion, render the population infected with HIV susceptible to quicker and aggressive progression to AIDS; so Malawi on the whole, is caught up in a serious, devastating vicious cycle of poverty, HIV and AIDS. Save the Children UK and Oxfam, 2002 agree as they say, “there is a clear-cut two-way relationship between HIV, AIDS and food insecurity in southern Africa; the pandemic is being driven by the very factors that cause malnutrition: poverty and inequality.” (Refer to Box Two for more information).
ANTRETROVIRAL THERAPY (ART) IN MALAWI.
Of all the people living with HIV and AIDS in Malawi, more than 200000 are in need of ART. Chimzizi and Harries, 2006 indicate that 170000 people, in 2006 stood in need of ART. The 170000-mark must have been passed by now and looking at Malawi’s Ministry of Health (MOH) figures of people requiring ART (Box one), it is projected that by the year 2010, 245000 people will have been started on ART but this too will be falling far short of the required need and demand if one considers that 90000 people become eligible for ART every year (Harries, Makombe, Libamba, Schouten and Lungu, of MOH, 2006).
ART demands on the body tissues and systems may be immense and the need for adequate food and nutrition may be of paramount importance as one gets treatment. ODI, 2006 augments this as they subtly intimate that evidence is emerging to the effect that adherence to treatment and the benefits from it are linked with access to food and nutrition. If one has no food, taking of medications may not count as much.
As Malawi grapples with the ever-growing need for ARV therapy, the need to prevent further infections becomes even more important and food security needs to be prioritised. It is a challenge to do this amidst other critical issues of poverty, gender inequalities, less-than-satisfactory political governance, a fragile and an immensely understaffed health care delivery system; but one that needs to be embarked on with diligence and all the political will that it deserves.
THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS TO HIV AND AIDS MANAGEMENT: MIXED TEHORIES (Barnett and Whiteside, 2002 and Campbell, 2003)
It has got to be appreciated in the final analysis that HIV and AIDS have got two major sides that need to be approximated together properly for comprehensive management strategies and if people-centred tangible results are to be realised. There is a biological dimension to HIV as well as a socio-economic one; the two so far, seem to have taken different routes and directions. There are theoretical perspectives that would aid in a holistic approach to HIV and AIDS management and this paper exemplifies two: - the Social Cohesion approach as advanced by Barnett and Whiteside and the integrated approach to prevention: Health promoting communities as articulated by Catherine Campbell. Barnett and Whiteside argue that for a long time HIV prevention strategies have concentrated on individuals and the risks they take as they engage with society – almost completely ignoring the context within which the risky indulgencies take place. They further argue that susceptibility and vulnerability to acquiring HIV and progression to AIDS and dying from it are directly related to the social cohesion and amount of wealth any society has.
Campbell, on the other hand, argues that prevention should look beyond biomedical and behavioural approaches. She advances the school of thought that HIV prevention – probably including management of effects – should be perceived and viewed as social and development endeavours. She argues that prevention should be strategized in such a way that an enabling environment for prevention is created other than persuading individuals to change their behaviour. She articulates that HIV should be viewed as a BIO-PSYCHO-SOCIAL problem – all three aspects should be brought together and operate in unison to register the successes that are sought (Campbell and Williams, 1999).
Malawi is a country that can easily be described as a socially cohesive society but with very low wealth – and according to Barnett and Whiteside such an environment offers enablement to a high HIV and AIDS epidemic like the case of India (Barnett and Whiteside, 2006). Malawians still practice a sense of belonging to what can be described as the traditional extended family set-up and this has provided, over the years, invaluable source of social capital on which people relied for several problems including ill-health. However HIV and AIDS are ripping through this social fabric so much that the system itself can palpably be seen to be getting fatigued as a direct consequence. More and more people have become ill from HIV, this is happening amidst excruciating poverty, immense gender inequalities etc and the epidemic seems to just have found a proper breeding ground to thrive (Chatterji, Murray, London and Anglewicz, 2004).
FOOD INSECURITY: ITS ROLE IN THE HIV AND AIDS-POVERTY CYCLE (Refer to Box Two)
Malawi is a low-wealth country meeting fully one aspect of the Barnett and Whiteside theory for an enabling environment for the HIV spread, thrive and flourish. Poverty leads to all sorts of shocks onto people’s livelihoods including food insecurity and this alone supports a fertile environment for the spread and flourishing of HIV. IPFRI, 2004 agree as they say “HIV/AIDS and food and nutritional insecurity may become increasingly entwined in a vicious circle – HIV/AIDS heightens vulnerability to food insecurity which in turn may heighten susceptibility to HIV infection.”
There are so many ways in which this can happen and one of them is that people, particularly women, will go to great lengths to acquire food for their families and the chances of indulging in risky behaviour e.g. transactional sex become very high (Swidler & Watkins 2006). Further to this an under-nourished body is incapable of sufficiently fighting off infection and an encounter with HIV may render a malnourished body significantly vulnerable to acquiring the infection and in a spiralling fashion, progress into AIDS becomes quick and almost inevitable.
A PERSUASIVE CASE FOR FERTILZER SUBSIDIES IN MALAWI
Malawi’s population has shifted from slightly below 4,000,000 in 1964 (at independence) to more than 13,000,000 in 2008. The land has remained the same and cultivation has been in almost the same fields, year in and year out. The dwindling sizes of land tenable to anyone Malawian and the inevitable depletion of soil nutrients, renders the agricultural sector, the mainstay of food production in the country, vulnerable to inadequacies leading to a population on a risky course of food insecurity (Chinsinga and O’brien, 2008). One of the strategies available to make sure Malawian families have adequate food is to try and ensure optimal production of food items, particularly maize, on these small-sized farms with dwindling soil nutrients as well as in the backdrop of a shrinking labour force in a severely income-unequal society (Refer to Box Three).
When the current government came to power in 2004, one of the things the President told and promised Malawians was to bring food to their plates. Despite serious resistance and misgivings from the World Bank, IMF, The US and Britain, the Malawi Government (MG) was determined to bring the fertilizer subsidies back – looking at it as the only way that would ensure adequate food production thereby bringing about the much needed food security to families and households. Bingu wa Muntharika, the President of Malawi, declared “as long as I am president, I do not want to be going to other capitals begging for food” (New York Times, 2007).
This may have been done HIV and AIDS-blind however, the policy seems to have worked for three years running. Malawi produced enough food supplies in the 2005/2006, 2006/2007 growing seasons and the indication is that the harvest for the 2007/2008 growing season will be pretty good too. The benefits in regard to HIV/AIDS management may be accruing.
IMPLICATIONS FOR HIV AND AIDS MANAGEMENT.
Adequate food provision as part of a response to HIV and AIDS is in tandem with article 28 (refer to Box 4) of the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) and governments need to respond and meet the demands of the article. The MG’s fertilizer subsidy policy is a defining policy in increasing the likelihood of sustained adequate, food production and provision for most Malawians and once they can be assured of food, day in and day out that will probably be a huge precondition for economic growth as more and more people may be able to participate in economic activities after food-needs are assured because food is a basic need that everybody will first try to secure before they can do anything else. This is and will be a recipe for increased household wealth and with the already long and deep running social cohesion, the conditionality for a more positively aggressive fight against HIV and AIDS may ensue – as Barnett and Whiteside do contend that high social cohesion and high wealth, more often than not results in a decreased HIV and AIDS epidemic. Increased household wealth, combined with the social cohesion will provide an enabling environment for individuals, families, households and larger communities to be more resilient to the devastating effects of HIV and AIDS as well as being in a position to negotiate new ways of preventing acquisition of the virus.
Added to this, as Catherine Campbell may argue, food security alone brings about a social state that is more stable and more productive in many ways – women for example, whose vulnerability to acquiring HIV increases with food insecurity, will be in a better position not to engage in activities that make them susceptible to acquiring the virus e.g. transactional sex. It can further be argued that food-secure families would be in a much more strong position to revisit gender relations which may lead to a reconstruction of the gender roles in a positive way and Catherine Campbell argues that this is important in the fight against HIV and AIDS.
Further to this the general population at large will be healthier and as it is medically true, well nourished bodies are more resilient at fighting off infection.
Further to this, with a good section of the population on ART and there is evidence that for those that are already on ART, adherence and benefits from the treatment are optimal if the nutritional needs are adequately met and continually catered for (ODI, 2006).
CONCLUSION
The conclusions of the Durban Conference on HIV/AIDS, Food and Nutrition Security (Box FIVE) cover in subtle terms it can be argued, what Barnett & Whiteside and Catherine Campbell advance as areas that need to be looked into as approaches to preventing and managing HIV and AIDS are concerned. The environment has to be one that disables the conditions that allow for the spread and proliferation of HIV and where AIDS has already taken its toll, the environment has to be that which facilitates resilient responses by individuals, families, households and communities. Good governance, for example, works well for the people in enabling them to participate in wealth creation and bringing about social development – key areas of contestation by Barnett & Whiteside and Campbell that have the capability of strengthening, in a positive way, the fight against HIV and AIDS and its effects on populations and their social and human development.
The Malawi nation, through its political leadership, to bring about food security by employing fertilizer subsidies, should stay this course for both, food security in its own right and as an important precondition to stabilize households, families and communities rendering them an opportunity to participate better in the fight against HIV and AIDS. And for those on ART, a well nourished body is more resilient to battling off OIs and better food renders ART more effective; there also is a cost saving benefit for households; even more so for the national economy (ODI, 2006).
Further to this, it is important for the government of Malawi to look at the sustainability of the programme in the long term. Some donors do not support subsidies to farm inputs and as time goes by, even those that sympathise with the programme may become fatigued. In this regard, it is of paramount importance to look at how Malawians themselves can fund the fertilizer subsidies as donors assist with other areas; even more important is the fact that Malawi should be diversifying its economic growth strategies and activities. With food-secure families, having started in 2006, there has to be a plan, forecast and drive to let Malawians own the programme.
The grey areas of the programme also need to be addressed and meticulously policed. Some quarters argue that the programme is highly politicised which may work to its detriment. It is also highly rumoured that some corrupt politicians take advantage of the situation; they buy the subsidised fertilizer in large quantities and sell the commodity at huge profits, sometimes even smuggling the commodity to neighbouring countries like Zambia (Afrol News/The Chronicle, 2008). Accountability may be the catch word here with all the whole-marks of answerability and enforceability (World Bank (WB), 2004).
Added to all this Malawi needs concerted efforts to work on its inequalities in the fields of gender as well as wealth distribution. Gender inequalities alone bring an avalanche of problems including the spread of HIV and the entrenchment of poverty. Working for a more gender equal Malawi will bring with it benefits in terms of social and food security alongside resilient participation in fighting off HIV. And as the WB 2006, purported, Malawi is one of the most unequal countries in terms of wealth distribution. It would be to the nation’s advantage, as it tackles its myriad problems, to look at this issue and work on strategies of wealth creation and redistribution. This will serve well as a precondition for resilient fights against HIV and AIDS and its effects. Catherine Campbell puts up a persuasive case in support of strategies that change people’s circumstances and she intimates that programs to prevent HIV infection and AIDS must seek to bring about change to the community as a whole and not just within individuals particularly in circumstances where the social and economic dimensions that divide people, thereby making them unequal, are precisely the same forces that increase their shared risk of HIV infection. This, in definite terms, puts up a case for change in peoples circumstances, socially as well as economically.
Malawi should position itself for a long time of excruciating morbidly and mortality caused by HIV and AIDS as a good percentage of the population is already infected and affected, however good policies have to be in place and especially those that help to break the vicious cycle of poverty and HIV and AIDs; the adequate and affordable provision of fertilizer is one of those policies that can aid in this fight. Malawi should stay the course because if it does it will be positively contributing to the achievement and fulfilment of Millennium Development goal six. (Refer to box 6).
REFERENCES
Afrol News/The Chronicle (2008). Malawi’s subsidised fertilizer smuggled and embezzled. [Online] Available on http://www.afrol.com/articles/17989 [Accessed on 1/04/08]
Barnett, T. and Whiteside, A (2006) AIDS in the Twenty-First Century: Disease and Globalization, London, Palgrave Macmillan
Campbell, C. (2003). Letting them Die: Why HIV/AIDS Prevention Programmes Fail. Oxford: James Currey. Bloomington: Indiana University Press: Capetown: Juta,Doubstorey. [A copyrighted copy is available on http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0253216354/ref=sib_fs_top?ie=UTF8&p=S009&checkSum=pmGAEch%2F%2BWqNhzQXXpWLejPUn07Zqshk2kRSD%2BUtR%2FQ%3D#reader-page ]
Campbell, C. and Williams, B. (1999). Beyond the Biomedical and behavioural: Towards an integrated approach to HIV Prevention in the South African Mining Industry. Social Science & Medicine, 48, 1625-1639.
Chatterji, M., Murray, N., London, D. and Anglewicz, P. (2004). The factors influencing transactional sex among young men and women in 12 Sub-Saharan African Countries. [Online] Available on http://www.policyproject.com/pubs/countryreports/Trans_Sex.pdf [Accessed on 28/03/2008].
Chimzizi, R. and Harries, A. (2006). Joint Tuberculosis/HIV Services in Malawi: Progress, challenges and the way forward. Bulletin of World Health Organization [Online] Available on http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/5/06-036665/en/index.html [Accessed on 28/03/08].
Chinsinga, B. and O’brien, A. (2008). How Agricultural Subsidiers are working in malawi. African Research Institute. [Document sent via personal email communication with Dr Blessings Chinsinga based at Chancellor College, a constituent college of the University of Malawi].
Drugger, C. (2007). Ending famine, simply by ignoring the experts. New York Times. [Online] Available on http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/world/africa/02malawi.html [Accessed on 01/04/08]
Gillespie, S., Kisemba-Mugwera, W. and Loevinsohn, M (2004). Africa: Assuring Food and Nutrition Security in the Time of AIDS. International Food Policy Reasearch Institute [Online] Available on http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/ib/ib19.pdf [Accessed on 29/03/04].
Gillespie, S. (2007). Food Security, Nutrition, HIV and AIDS. International Food Policy Research Institute [Handout given in the HIV and Development Class, Queen Margaret University].
Harries, A., Makombe, S., Libamba, E., and Lungu, D. (2006). The XVI International AIDS Conference: 5-Year Plan for Antiretroviral scale up in Malawi: 2006-2010. Ministry of Health and Population, Malawi. [Online] Available on http://www.aegis.com/conferences/iac/2006/WePE0081.pdf [Accessed on 20/03/08].
Harries, A., Makombe, S., Libamba, E.,Schouten, E. and Lungu, D. (2006). The XVI International AIDS Conference: 5-Year Plan for Antiretroviral scale up in Malawi: 2006-2010. Ministry of Health and Population, Malawi. [Online] Available on http://www.msh.org/news_room/events/aids2006_pdf/03_aidsconf2006.pdf [Accessed on 23/03/08].
ODI (2006). Briefing Paper 7: Food, Nutrition and HIV: What Next? [Online] Available on http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/briefing/bp_aug06_hiv_nutrition.pdf [Accessed on 27/03/2008].
Orr, A and Orr, S. (2002). Agriculture and Micro Enterprise in Malawi’s Rural South. Agricultural Research & Extension Network/Overseas Development Institute [Online] Available on http://www.odi.org.uk/networks/agren/papers/agrenpaper_119.pdf [Accessed on 19/03/08].
Save the Children UK and Oxfam, (2002). HIV/AIDS and Food Security in Southern Africa. [Online] Available on http://www.oxfam.org/en/files/pp021127_aids_safrica.pdf [Accessed on 21/03/08].
Swidler, A. and Watkins, S.(2006). Ties of Dependence: AIDS and Transactional Sex in rural Malawi: California Center for Population Research [Online] Available on http://www.ccpr.ucla.edu/ccprwpseries/ccpr_063_06.pdf [Accessed on 23/03/08]
UN (2005). Millennium Development Goals. [Online] Available on http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ [Accessed on 02/04.08]
UNAIDS (2008). Country Situation Analysis: Malawi [Online] Available on http://www.unaids.org/en/CountryResponses/Countries/malawi.asp [Accessed on 29/03/08].
World Bank (1996) Malawi human resources and poverty: Profile and priorities for action. Report No. 15437-MAI. Washington DC: World Bank
World Bank (2004). World Development Report: Making Services Work for the Poor People. Washington. World Bank & Oxford University Press.
Agricultural production is the sole source of food provision to the population. While tobacco, coffee and tea are the main cash crops, maize is the crop that is regarded as “food” for many Malawian families. However, the agricultural sector is vulnerable to so many shocks including adverse weather and soil nutrient depletion and these render the sector, the mainstay of the economy and food provision for the country, immensely unreliable at times. The rainy season, running from about November to March supports and sustains only one growing season (Chinsinga and O’Brien, 2008). Any individual, family or community coming out of that growing season with inadequate maize or any of the cash crops is left open to hunger and starvation as there is no tangible and stable social welfare system in the country, considering its small and low economic base, to come in handy for the people in times of lean harvests. Livelihoods stagger when this happens; and Malawi has had its fair share of chronic hunger stretching across all the three governments Malawi has had since independence in 1964. Adverse weather conditions and the ever-skyrocketing prices of inorganic fertilizers have played their role in this.
MALAWI, AND THE HIV, AIDS-POVERTY CYCLE.
Malawi is a small country in the sub-Saharan region of the vast continent of Africa. This region has the greatest burden of disease in the world, even more so the burden of HIV and AIDS. Malawi alone is home to close to one million people living with HIV and AIDS; representing, of the 13,000,000+ people in Malawi, 14.1% of those aged between 15 and 49 (UNAIDS, 2008).
As can be deduced from this, the impact of HIV on any sector in Malawi is devastating and agriculture has not been spared. It can be argued that the loss of labour and manpower, owing to HIV, is considerably significant so as to stand independently as a factor in the low food and cash crop production in Malawi at present. Additively, the low economic growth of the country, the inability to respond to shocks of different sorts because of poverty and the constant state of food-insecurity have a significant bearing on the wild-fire-like spread of HIV – and these factors, in a compounding fashion, render the population infected with HIV susceptible to quicker and aggressive progression to AIDS; so Malawi on the whole, is caught up in a serious, devastating vicious cycle of poverty, HIV and AIDS. Save the Children UK and Oxfam, 2002 agree as they say, “there is a clear-cut two-way relationship between HIV, AIDS and food insecurity in southern Africa; the pandemic is being driven by the very factors that cause malnutrition: poverty and inequality.” (Refer to Box Two for more information).
ANTRETROVIRAL THERAPY (ART) IN MALAWI.
Of all the people living with HIV and AIDS in Malawi, more than 200000 are in need of ART. Chimzizi and Harries, 2006 indicate that 170000 people, in 2006 stood in need of ART. The 170000-mark must have been passed by now and looking at Malawi’s Ministry of Health (MOH) figures of people requiring ART (Box one), it is projected that by the year 2010, 245000 people will have been started on ART but this too will be falling far short of the required need and demand if one considers that 90000 people become eligible for ART every year (Harries, Makombe, Libamba, Schouten and Lungu, of MOH, 2006).
ART demands on the body tissues and systems may be immense and the need for adequate food and nutrition may be of paramount importance as one gets treatment. ODI, 2006 augments this as they subtly intimate that evidence is emerging to the effect that adherence to treatment and the benefits from it are linked with access to food and nutrition. If one has no food, taking of medications may not count as much.
As Malawi grapples with the ever-growing need for ARV therapy, the need to prevent further infections becomes even more important and food security needs to be prioritised. It is a challenge to do this amidst other critical issues of poverty, gender inequalities, less-than-satisfactory political governance, a fragile and an immensely understaffed health care delivery system; but one that needs to be embarked on with diligence and all the political will that it deserves.
THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS TO HIV AND AIDS MANAGEMENT: MIXED TEHORIES (Barnett and Whiteside, 2002 and Campbell, 2003)
It has got to be appreciated in the final analysis that HIV and AIDS have got two major sides that need to be approximated together properly for comprehensive management strategies and if people-centred tangible results are to be realised. There is a biological dimension to HIV as well as a socio-economic one; the two so far, seem to have taken different routes and directions. There are theoretical perspectives that would aid in a holistic approach to HIV and AIDS management and this paper exemplifies two: - the Social Cohesion approach as advanced by Barnett and Whiteside and the integrated approach to prevention: Health promoting communities as articulated by Catherine Campbell. Barnett and Whiteside argue that for a long time HIV prevention strategies have concentrated on individuals and the risks they take as they engage with society – almost completely ignoring the context within which the risky indulgencies take place. They further argue that susceptibility and vulnerability to acquiring HIV and progression to AIDS and dying from it are directly related to the social cohesion and amount of wealth any society has.
Campbell, on the other hand, argues that prevention should look beyond biomedical and behavioural approaches. She advances the school of thought that HIV prevention – probably including management of effects – should be perceived and viewed as social and development endeavours. She argues that prevention should be strategized in such a way that an enabling environment for prevention is created other than persuading individuals to change their behaviour. She articulates that HIV should be viewed as a BIO-PSYCHO-SOCIAL problem – all three aspects should be brought together and operate in unison to register the successes that are sought (Campbell and Williams, 1999).
Malawi is a country that can easily be described as a socially cohesive society but with very low wealth – and according to Barnett and Whiteside such an environment offers enablement to a high HIV and AIDS epidemic like the case of India (Barnett and Whiteside, 2006). Malawians still practice a sense of belonging to what can be described as the traditional extended family set-up and this has provided, over the years, invaluable source of social capital on which people relied for several problems including ill-health. However HIV and AIDS are ripping through this social fabric so much that the system itself can palpably be seen to be getting fatigued as a direct consequence. More and more people have become ill from HIV, this is happening amidst excruciating poverty, immense gender inequalities etc and the epidemic seems to just have found a proper breeding ground to thrive (Chatterji, Murray, London and Anglewicz, 2004).
FOOD INSECURITY: ITS ROLE IN THE HIV AND AIDS-POVERTY CYCLE (Refer to Box Two)
Malawi is a low-wealth country meeting fully one aspect of the Barnett and Whiteside theory for an enabling environment for the HIV spread, thrive and flourish. Poverty leads to all sorts of shocks onto people’s livelihoods including food insecurity and this alone supports a fertile environment for the spread and flourishing of HIV. IPFRI, 2004 agree as they say “HIV/AIDS and food and nutritional insecurity may become increasingly entwined in a vicious circle – HIV/AIDS heightens vulnerability to food insecurity which in turn may heighten susceptibility to HIV infection.”
There are so many ways in which this can happen and one of them is that people, particularly women, will go to great lengths to acquire food for their families and the chances of indulging in risky behaviour e.g. transactional sex become very high (Swidler & Watkins 2006). Further to this an under-nourished body is incapable of sufficiently fighting off infection and an encounter with HIV may render a malnourished body significantly vulnerable to acquiring the infection and in a spiralling fashion, progress into AIDS becomes quick and almost inevitable.
A PERSUASIVE CASE FOR FERTILZER SUBSIDIES IN MALAWI
Malawi’s population has shifted from slightly below 4,000,000 in 1964 (at independence) to more than 13,000,000 in 2008. The land has remained the same and cultivation has been in almost the same fields, year in and year out. The dwindling sizes of land tenable to anyone Malawian and the inevitable depletion of soil nutrients, renders the agricultural sector, the mainstay of food production in the country, vulnerable to inadequacies leading to a population on a risky course of food insecurity (Chinsinga and O’brien, 2008). One of the strategies available to make sure Malawian families have adequate food is to try and ensure optimal production of food items, particularly maize, on these small-sized farms with dwindling soil nutrients as well as in the backdrop of a shrinking labour force in a severely income-unequal society (Refer to Box Three).
When the current government came to power in 2004, one of the things the President told and promised Malawians was to bring food to their plates. Despite serious resistance and misgivings from the World Bank, IMF, The US and Britain, the Malawi Government (MG) was determined to bring the fertilizer subsidies back – looking at it as the only way that would ensure adequate food production thereby bringing about the much needed food security to families and households. Bingu wa Muntharika, the President of Malawi, declared “as long as I am president, I do not want to be going to other capitals begging for food” (New York Times, 2007).
This may have been done HIV and AIDS-blind however, the policy seems to have worked for three years running. Malawi produced enough food supplies in the 2005/2006, 2006/2007 growing seasons and the indication is that the harvest for the 2007/2008 growing season will be pretty good too. The benefits in regard to HIV/AIDS management may be accruing.
IMPLICATIONS FOR HIV AND AIDS MANAGEMENT.
Adequate food provision as part of a response to HIV and AIDS is in tandem with article 28 (refer to Box 4) of the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) and governments need to respond and meet the demands of the article. The MG’s fertilizer subsidy policy is a defining policy in increasing the likelihood of sustained adequate, food production and provision for most Malawians and once they can be assured of food, day in and day out that will probably be a huge precondition for economic growth as more and more people may be able to participate in economic activities after food-needs are assured because food is a basic need that everybody will first try to secure before they can do anything else. This is and will be a recipe for increased household wealth and with the already long and deep running social cohesion, the conditionality for a more positively aggressive fight against HIV and AIDS may ensue – as Barnett and Whiteside do contend that high social cohesion and high wealth, more often than not results in a decreased HIV and AIDS epidemic. Increased household wealth, combined with the social cohesion will provide an enabling environment for individuals, families, households and larger communities to be more resilient to the devastating effects of HIV and AIDS as well as being in a position to negotiate new ways of preventing acquisition of the virus.
Added to this, as Catherine Campbell may argue, food security alone brings about a social state that is more stable and more productive in many ways – women for example, whose vulnerability to acquiring HIV increases with food insecurity, will be in a better position not to engage in activities that make them susceptible to acquiring the virus e.g. transactional sex. It can further be argued that food-secure families would be in a much more strong position to revisit gender relations which may lead to a reconstruction of the gender roles in a positive way and Catherine Campbell argues that this is important in the fight against HIV and AIDS.
Further to this the general population at large will be healthier and as it is medically true, well nourished bodies are more resilient at fighting off infection.
Further to this, with a good section of the population on ART and there is evidence that for those that are already on ART, adherence and benefits from the treatment are optimal if the nutritional needs are adequately met and continually catered for (ODI, 2006).
CONCLUSION
The conclusions of the Durban Conference on HIV/AIDS, Food and Nutrition Security (Box FIVE) cover in subtle terms it can be argued, what Barnett & Whiteside and Catherine Campbell advance as areas that need to be looked into as approaches to preventing and managing HIV and AIDS are concerned. The environment has to be one that disables the conditions that allow for the spread and proliferation of HIV and where AIDS has already taken its toll, the environment has to be that which facilitates resilient responses by individuals, families, households and communities. Good governance, for example, works well for the people in enabling them to participate in wealth creation and bringing about social development – key areas of contestation by Barnett & Whiteside and Campbell that have the capability of strengthening, in a positive way, the fight against HIV and AIDS and its effects on populations and their social and human development.
The Malawi nation, through its political leadership, to bring about food security by employing fertilizer subsidies, should stay this course for both, food security in its own right and as an important precondition to stabilize households, families and communities rendering them an opportunity to participate better in the fight against HIV and AIDS. And for those on ART, a well nourished body is more resilient to battling off OIs and better food renders ART more effective; there also is a cost saving benefit for households; even more so for the national economy (ODI, 2006).
Further to this, it is important for the government of Malawi to look at the sustainability of the programme in the long term. Some donors do not support subsidies to farm inputs and as time goes by, even those that sympathise with the programme may become fatigued. In this regard, it is of paramount importance to look at how Malawians themselves can fund the fertilizer subsidies as donors assist with other areas; even more important is the fact that Malawi should be diversifying its economic growth strategies and activities. With food-secure families, having started in 2006, there has to be a plan, forecast and drive to let Malawians own the programme.
The grey areas of the programme also need to be addressed and meticulously policed. Some quarters argue that the programme is highly politicised which may work to its detriment. It is also highly rumoured that some corrupt politicians take advantage of the situation; they buy the subsidised fertilizer in large quantities and sell the commodity at huge profits, sometimes even smuggling the commodity to neighbouring countries like Zambia (Afrol News/The Chronicle, 2008). Accountability may be the catch word here with all the whole-marks of answerability and enforceability (World Bank (WB), 2004).
Added to all this Malawi needs concerted efforts to work on its inequalities in the fields of gender as well as wealth distribution. Gender inequalities alone bring an avalanche of problems including the spread of HIV and the entrenchment of poverty. Working for a more gender equal Malawi will bring with it benefits in terms of social and food security alongside resilient participation in fighting off HIV. And as the WB 2006, purported, Malawi is one of the most unequal countries in terms of wealth distribution. It would be to the nation’s advantage, as it tackles its myriad problems, to look at this issue and work on strategies of wealth creation and redistribution. This will serve well as a precondition for resilient fights against HIV and AIDS and its effects. Catherine Campbell puts up a persuasive case in support of strategies that change people’s circumstances and she intimates that programs to prevent HIV infection and AIDS must seek to bring about change to the community as a whole and not just within individuals particularly in circumstances where the social and economic dimensions that divide people, thereby making them unequal, are precisely the same forces that increase their shared risk of HIV infection. This, in definite terms, puts up a case for change in peoples circumstances, socially as well as economically.
Malawi should position itself for a long time of excruciating morbidly and mortality caused by HIV and AIDS as a good percentage of the population is already infected and affected, however good policies have to be in place and especially those that help to break the vicious cycle of poverty and HIV and AIDs; the adequate and affordable provision of fertilizer is one of those policies that can aid in this fight. Malawi should stay the course because if it does it will be positively contributing to the achievement and fulfilment of Millennium Development goal six. (Refer to box 6).
REFERENCES
Afrol News/The Chronicle (2008). Malawi’s subsidised fertilizer smuggled and embezzled. [Online] Available on http://www.afrol.com/articles/17989 [Accessed on 1/04/08]
Barnett, T. and Whiteside, A (2006) AIDS in the Twenty-First Century: Disease and Globalization, London, Palgrave Macmillan
Campbell, C. (2003). Letting them Die: Why HIV/AIDS Prevention Programmes Fail. Oxford: James Currey. Bloomington: Indiana University Press: Capetown: Juta,Doubstorey. [A copyrighted copy is available on http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0253216354/ref=sib_fs_top?ie=UTF8&p=S009&checkSum=pmGAEch%2F%2BWqNhzQXXpWLejPUn07Zqshk2kRSD%2BUtR%2FQ%3D#reader-page ]
Campbell, C. and Williams, B. (1999). Beyond the Biomedical and behavioural: Towards an integrated approach to HIV Prevention in the South African Mining Industry. Social Science & Medicine, 48, 1625-1639.
Chatterji, M., Murray, N., London, D. and Anglewicz, P. (2004). The factors influencing transactional sex among young men and women in 12 Sub-Saharan African Countries. [Online] Available on http://www.policyproject.com/pubs/countryreports/Trans_Sex.pdf [Accessed on 28/03/2008].
Chimzizi, R. and Harries, A. (2006). Joint Tuberculosis/HIV Services in Malawi: Progress, challenges and the way forward. Bulletin of World Health Organization [Online] Available on http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/5/06-036665/en/index.html [Accessed on 28/03/08].
Chinsinga, B. and O’brien, A. (2008). How Agricultural Subsidiers are working in malawi. African Research Institute. [Document sent via personal email communication with Dr Blessings Chinsinga based at Chancellor College, a constituent college of the University of Malawi].
Drugger, C. (2007). Ending famine, simply by ignoring the experts. New York Times. [Online] Available on http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/world/africa/02malawi.html [Accessed on 01/04/08]
Gillespie, S., Kisemba-Mugwera, W. and Loevinsohn, M (2004). Africa: Assuring Food and Nutrition Security in the Time of AIDS. International Food Policy Reasearch Institute [Online] Available on http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/ib/ib19.pdf [Accessed on 29/03/04].
Gillespie, S. (2007). Food Security, Nutrition, HIV and AIDS. International Food Policy Research Institute [Handout given in the HIV and Development Class, Queen Margaret University].
Harries, A., Makombe, S., Libamba, E., and Lungu, D. (2006). The XVI International AIDS Conference: 5-Year Plan for Antiretroviral scale up in Malawi: 2006-2010. Ministry of Health and Population, Malawi. [Online] Available on http://www.aegis.com/conferences/iac/2006/WePE0081.pdf [Accessed on 20/03/08].
Harries, A., Makombe, S., Libamba, E.,Schouten, E. and Lungu, D. (2006). The XVI International AIDS Conference: 5-Year Plan for Antiretroviral scale up in Malawi: 2006-2010. Ministry of Health and Population, Malawi. [Online] Available on http://www.msh.org/news_room/events/aids2006_pdf/03_aidsconf2006.pdf [Accessed on 23/03/08].
ODI (2006). Briefing Paper 7: Food, Nutrition and HIV: What Next? [Online] Available on http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/briefing/bp_aug06_hiv_nutrition.pdf [Accessed on 27/03/2008].
Orr, A and Orr, S. (2002). Agriculture and Micro Enterprise in Malawi’s Rural South. Agricultural Research & Extension Network/Overseas Development Institute [Online] Available on http://www.odi.org.uk/networks/agren/papers/agrenpaper_119.pdf [Accessed on 19/03/08].
Save the Children UK and Oxfam, (2002). HIV/AIDS and Food Security in Southern Africa. [Online] Available on http://www.oxfam.org/en/files/pp021127_aids_safrica.pdf [Accessed on 21/03/08].
Swidler, A. and Watkins, S.(2006). Ties of Dependence: AIDS and Transactional Sex in rural Malawi: California Center for Population Research [Online] Available on http://www.ccpr.ucla.edu/ccprwpseries/ccpr_063_06.pdf [Accessed on 23/03/08]
UN (2005). Millennium Development Goals. [Online] Available on http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ [Accessed on 02/04.08]
UNAIDS (2008). Country Situation Analysis: Malawi [Online] Available on http://www.unaids.org/en/CountryResponses/Countries/malawi.asp [Accessed on 29/03/08].
World Bank (1996) Malawi human resources and poverty: Profile and priorities for action. Report No. 15437-MAI. Washington DC: World Bank
World Bank (2004). World Development Report: Making Services Work for the Poor People. Washington. World Bank & Oxford University Press.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Malawi: Opposition parties in turmoil
I have alluded to a few material facts in the course of the past few days about the opposition parties in Malawi on Nyasanet and Malawi Talk - of particular interest are the UDF and MCP. Malawi Congress Party is known for its ruthless (mis)rule for a good 30+ years from 1964 to somewhere in 1992 (allow me to use 1992 – please). They are also known for having resisted to the bone the fast approaching multi-party system of Government - but the Malawian people were not to retreat and in 1993, a resounding yes vote to multipartyism through a referendum saw the end of the road to the once-mighty party and the 2004 general elections only fixed the last nail on MCP's coffin. It is quite by luck and chance that MCP still exists today - may be we could have done better, right in 1994, to outlaw this party based on the history that it had bagged for itself for all the years it was in power.
UDF is known for its (mis)rule from 1994 to 2004. For lack of a better word, UDF (mis)ruled Malawi by hook or crook salvaging every opportunity they had to loot and plunder the already meagre Malawi's economy. UDF echelons power, UDF's elite, UDF's leadership, arguably, within 10 years of their days in the ruling elite of Malawi gathered for themselves a lot of wealth and riches whose source is far more questionable than understandable. This party is also known for its kid-glove approach to issues of economic recovery, governing by systems, wishy-washy policies on every aspect of our lives and above all, it is also remembered for its leadership's willingness to cling to power after the two five year terms came to their close. The first coinage was for the presidential terms to be limitless - open terms - they called it - this crashed and there was a sister-coinage - third term they called it - this too crashed, falling headlong in the backdrop of violence that the UDF unleashed against its own people for purely selfish gains. The UDF is known for something else - the lack of diverse talent from which they can select their leadership glaringly showing its head in recent times when an attempt has been made, not clearly out of the way yet, to let Muluzi have another go at the Presidency. If you stop and pause, you will discover the UDF's willingness to always want, or at least, at every opportune time they have, to bring our Constitution to unnecessary jitters, in power or out of it.
The two parties, UDF and MCP, have now combined forces to try and undermine the current government for reasons best known to themselves. They argue, in the recent political impasse, that DPP has "poached" their MPs. What this argument fails to acknowledge is the free will of those Mps exercised in their shift of focus and their willingness to participate in the developmental processes that are genuinely taking place in and within our country, much to the dislike of their partys' leadership, Joh Zenus Ungapake Tembo and Bakili Muluzi, to be precise…it would bne interesting to dig deep into what Muluzi kept saying about John Zenus Ungapake Tembo during his 10 years as President. Some good analysts may want to have a good go at their newly-found unity of purpose or is it unity of convenience?
Bingu's forward looking leadership, despite all the daily politics that seem to always be intent at bogging him down, poses a stiff challenge to the history of both the UDF and MCP and it seems to unleash the old self, inherent in these two parties to not, almost always, stand up for ideals that define progressive movement of the Malawian people. They are used to underhand tactics. Take, for example, Bakili Muluz’s unwritten policy on developmental projects – if there is no UDF MP in some constituency, forget about development. Bingu has beaten this record by far – Go to the very constituency of John Zenus Ungapake Tembo, you will discover that Bingu and Muluzi are different when it comes to a national agenda on development.
While one would want to appreciate the freedoms that come with a democratic dispensation, neither the MCP nor the UDF can stand on a moral higher ground than the current government to have stood for, let alone standing for, greater freedoms for the Malawian people. The very things that MCP and UDF are doing today, would have earned Malawian citizens the wrath of these parties during their hay days - today that happens without much ado...JZU has the guts and audacity of saying "he stands for justice, they can kill me but they can not kill justice" - how times change, really. The UDF, in the present circumstances, has the space and freedom to exude all sorts of strange political stand-points without the fear that some form of Young Democrats will be on their backs, beating, injuring and maiming. Who do we, as a nation, owe this to? In the view of this writer, we owe it to a leadership that wants to put Malawi first, Malawi that is progressively moving towards a positive direction where Malawi defines its own destiny.
We do not have to go very far to notice that there has been a phenomenal change of events - look to the University of Malawi - the students see the need to support government, not because, as many quarters want to portray it, Government is funding the support, no, but because funding to the institution of higher learning has increased and stabilised in its supply making learning easier to undertake - a big contrast to the UDF's way of funding and approaching University education - that the same, I mean university education is a luxury, was the thinking of the United Democratic Front.
Our MPs, the third arm of Government, need to stand up and be counted. They need to start thinking "development and progression" of the Malawian people - I mean until when are we going to leave and let our people survive on less than a dollar a day? Is it not time, that if there are Malawians amidst us, who can direct this ship and dock it safely where we all want to go and be, those Malawians need to be supported by all of us - yes including by the opposition parties, - opposition does not mean oppose for the sake of it - it is about offering alternatives, alternatives that can, in stature and well- meaning ness, outweigh and outplay, the policies that the government that may be, at any particular time, implements.
It is time we shelved the daily politics and start competing with each other on good policies - let us leave the daily politics for campaigning periods and not when it is time to govern.
Isaac Cheke Ziba
Livingston
Scotland.
UDF is known for its (mis)rule from 1994 to 2004. For lack of a better word, UDF (mis)ruled Malawi by hook or crook salvaging every opportunity they had to loot and plunder the already meagre Malawi's economy. UDF echelons power, UDF's elite, UDF's leadership, arguably, within 10 years of their days in the ruling elite of Malawi gathered for themselves a lot of wealth and riches whose source is far more questionable than understandable. This party is also known for its kid-glove approach to issues of economic recovery, governing by systems, wishy-washy policies on every aspect of our lives and above all, it is also remembered for its leadership's willingness to cling to power after the two five year terms came to their close. The first coinage was for the presidential terms to be limitless - open terms - they called it - this crashed and there was a sister-coinage - third term they called it - this too crashed, falling headlong in the backdrop of violence that the UDF unleashed against its own people for purely selfish gains. The UDF is known for something else - the lack of diverse talent from which they can select their leadership glaringly showing its head in recent times when an attempt has been made, not clearly out of the way yet, to let Muluzi have another go at the Presidency. If you stop and pause, you will discover the UDF's willingness to always want, or at least, at every opportune time they have, to bring our Constitution to unnecessary jitters, in power or out of it.
The two parties, UDF and MCP, have now combined forces to try and undermine the current government for reasons best known to themselves. They argue, in the recent political impasse, that DPP has "poached" their MPs. What this argument fails to acknowledge is the free will of those Mps exercised in their shift of focus and their willingness to participate in the developmental processes that are genuinely taking place in and within our country, much to the dislike of their partys' leadership, Joh Zenus Ungapake Tembo and Bakili Muluzi, to be precise…it would bne interesting to dig deep into what Muluzi kept saying about John Zenus Ungapake Tembo during his 10 years as President. Some good analysts may want to have a good go at their newly-found unity of purpose or is it unity of convenience?
Bingu's forward looking leadership, despite all the daily politics that seem to always be intent at bogging him down, poses a stiff challenge to the history of both the UDF and MCP and it seems to unleash the old self, inherent in these two parties to not, almost always, stand up for ideals that define progressive movement of the Malawian people. They are used to underhand tactics. Take, for example, Bakili Muluz’s unwritten policy on developmental projects – if there is no UDF MP in some constituency, forget about development. Bingu has beaten this record by far – Go to the very constituency of John Zenus Ungapake Tembo, you will discover that Bingu and Muluzi are different when it comes to a national agenda on development.
While one would want to appreciate the freedoms that come with a democratic dispensation, neither the MCP nor the UDF can stand on a moral higher ground than the current government to have stood for, let alone standing for, greater freedoms for the Malawian people. The very things that MCP and UDF are doing today, would have earned Malawian citizens the wrath of these parties during their hay days - today that happens without much ado...JZU has the guts and audacity of saying "he stands for justice, they can kill me but they can not kill justice" - how times change, really. The UDF, in the present circumstances, has the space and freedom to exude all sorts of strange political stand-points without the fear that some form of Young Democrats will be on their backs, beating, injuring and maiming. Who do we, as a nation, owe this to? In the view of this writer, we owe it to a leadership that wants to put Malawi first, Malawi that is progressively moving towards a positive direction where Malawi defines its own destiny.
We do not have to go very far to notice that there has been a phenomenal change of events - look to the University of Malawi - the students see the need to support government, not because, as many quarters want to portray it, Government is funding the support, no, but because funding to the institution of higher learning has increased and stabilised in its supply making learning easier to undertake - a big contrast to the UDF's way of funding and approaching University education - that the same, I mean university education is a luxury, was the thinking of the United Democratic Front.
Our MPs, the third arm of Government, need to stand up and be counted. They need to start thinking "development and progression" of the Malawian people - I mean until when are we going to leave and let our people survive on less than a dollar a day? Is it not time, that if there are Malawians amidst us, who can direct this ship and dock it safely where we all want to go and be, those Malawians need to be supported by all of us - yes including by the opposition parties, - opposition does not mean oppose for the sake of it - it is about offering alternatives, alternatives that can, in stature and well- meaning ness, outweigh and outplay, the policies that the government that may be, at any particular time, implements.
It is time we shelved the daily politics and start competing with each other on good policies - let us leave the daily politics for campaigning periods and not when it is time to govern.
Isaac Cheke Ziba
Livingston
Scotland.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Most Parties (in Malawi) are regionalistic
Annie,
Your sentiments below, well respected but I want to give an alternative argument...you do not have to agree with it.
Part of the problem, in my view, is that we want to believe or we have made ourselves believe that our parties have to or do operate on regionalistic lines and as days went and go by, we have told ourselves that this is "normal"...it is not normal, at least in my view, we can all move out from this comfort zone and embrace the challenges of a national identity for our political parties.
As I argued yesterday, I see very few of our politicians, the current crop, withstanding the heat of a Malawi that woke up strong from the nightmare of "regionalism" - most of them would not know what to do with a united Malawi, a Malawi that told itself and its people that "Malawi is our country" and we want sensible leadership for ourselves." Further to that, what makes you think, really, a Malawian originating from a region other than the Central region should not or can not be leader of MCP? What makes you think that a Malawian originating from a region other than the South can not pick up the top notch job in the UDF? And what makes you think a Malawian originating from a region other than the North can not be President of AFORD?
Annie, it is the root cause of this thinking and its perpetual nurturing that makes our current crop of politicians continue to take advantage, very unnecessary advantage, of the same to divide and rule us...we can help to reshape the thinking of our people and you never know, Nyasanet and Malawi Talk could be starting points for progressive thinking in combating regionalism, perceived or actual.
Malawians, in my view, would care very little about where their leader comes from provided that leader facilitates the arrival of food on their plates on a daily, constant basis, Malawians, in my view, would care very little of where their leader comes from if that leader facilitated improvement in the quality of Malawians' lives; in my view Malawians will care very little where their leader comes from if that leader facilitated good infrastructural development, Malawians, in my view, will care very little where their leader comes from if that leader made Malawian matter in his leadership dispensation, Malawians, yes, in my view, will care very little where their leader comes from if that leader made them live on more than a dollar a day, in real terms.
We, the people that think it is ok, normal, insurmountable for political party leadership to be based on regions contribute heavily, hugely and immensely to the backward movement of a nation that, at best, should be marching forward...we are in the 21st century for God's sake...let us move on, let us judge our possible leaders on the content of their leadership jars, on the content of their characters, on the content of their integrity other than a very simple and irrelevant consideration of where they happen to come from...
My heart bleeds...
Isaac Cheke Ziba
Livingston
Annie Kumwenda wrote:
Koma anthu mwatota_ni? Zipani zambiri mu Malawi are regionalistic whatever that means. Aford is for the north, MCP is for the centre Yudievu (UDF) is for the south. Tisanamizane apa kuti aford president angachokere pakati kapena ku mwera !! Mwauponda wauwisi ndithu wochita kudzola ngati mafuta phazi lonse ntchentche zili ng'waa ngati nakubabada Mbuya wa ku Nsanje!! Kapena kuti MCP ingalamuliridwe ndi a kumpoto kapena kumwera ayi !! Si a Tcheya awa amene akukakamira mpandowu. Anthu inu mwatota_ni? Leave aford alone
Annie
Your sentiments below, well respected but I want to give an alternative argument...you do not have to agree with it.
Part of the problem, in my view, is that we want to believe or we have made ourselves believe that our parties have to or do operate on regionalistic lines and as days went and go by, we have told ourselves that this is "normal"...it is not normal, at least in my view, we can all move out from this comfort zone and embrace the challenges of a national identity for our political parties.
As I argued yesterday, I see very few of our politicians, the current crop, withstanding the heat of a Malawi that woke up strong from the nightmare of "regionalism" - most of them would not know what to do with a united Malawi, a Malawi that told itself and its people that "Malawi is our country" and we want sensible leadership for ourselves." Further to that, what makes you think, really, a Malawian originating from a region other than the Central region should not or can not be leader of MCP? What makes you think that a Malawian originating from a region other than the South can not pick up the top notch job in the UDF? And what makes you think a Malawian originating from a region other than the North can not be President of AFORD?
Annie, it is the root cause of this thinking and its perpetual nurturing that makes our current crop of politicians continue to take advantage, very unnecessary advantage, of the same to divide and rule us...we can help to reshape the thinking of our people and you never know, Nyasanet and Malawi Talk could be starting points for progressive thinking in combating regionalism, perceived or actual.
Malawians, in my view, would care very little about where their leader comes from provided that leader facilitates the arrival of food on their plates on a daily, constant basis, Malawians, in my view, would care very little of where their leader comes from if that leader facilitated improvement in the quality of Malawians' lives; in my view Malawians will care very little where their leader comes from if that leader facilitated good infrastructural development, Malawians, in my view, will care very little where their leader comes from if that leader made Malawian matter in his leadership dispensation, Malawians, yes, in my view, will care very little where their leader comes from if that leader made them live on more than a dollar a day, in real terms.
We, the people that think it is ok, normal, insurmountable for political party leadership to be based on regions contribute heavily, hugely and immensely to the backward movement of a nation that, at best, should be marching forward...we are in the 21st century for God's sake...let us move on, let us judge our possible leaders on the content of their leadership jars, on the content of their characters, on the content of their integrity other than a very simple and irrelevant consideration of where they happen to come from...
My heart bleeds...
Isaac Cheke Ziba
Livingston
Annie Kumwenda
Koma anthu mwatota_ni? Zipani zambiri mu Malawi are regionalistic whatever that means. Aford is for the north, MCP is for the centre Yudievu (UDF) is for the south. Tisanamizane apa kuti aford president angachokere pakati kapena ku mwera !! Mwauponda wauwisi ndithu wochita kudzola ngati mafuta phazi lonse ntchentche zili ng'waa ngati nakubabada Mbuya wa ku Nsanje!! Kapena kuti MCP ingalamuliridwe ndi a kumpoto kapena kumwera ayi !! Si a Tcheya awa amene akukakamira mpandowu. Anthu inu mwatota_ni? Leave aford alone
Annie
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
ATCHEYA & THE PRESIDENTAL COMEBACK PROJECT
Ambuje, in all our arguments on this issue, you may want to internalise this advice, the advice that one of the leading Lawyers in our land gave us, at Kamuzu College of Nursing, through me and my Executive Committee at the time; he said and I quote: - "The Law is double edged." To put it into context, in our studently (allow me to coin a word as well, see how you are influencing my writing, Ambuje) wisdom we decided we had had enough of one of our lecturers. The wrangle ballooned out of KCN and went to the University Office and the University office wrote back in very very simple terms, basically saying "the responsibility of hiring and firing lecturers rests with it (the University Office)...but that is all they did, they never addressed the main issue that led to an ugly situation like the one we had at hand...it bounced back to College level and it was becoming al legal issue at the close of each day and we made an executive decision, as the Kamuzu College Of Nursing Students' Union (KCNSU) under my dynamic leadership (hahahahaha) to start legal consultations - we had no idea how we were going to foot our bills, our account as KCNSU was in the red, every time, even after the college slashes MK30.00 from every student - apparently our predecessors had left lots of loans which books we had no access to - politics Ambuje, even at College level in the University of Malawi...the good thing though, with just one call from this "crafty Lawyer" to KCN first and then to the people at the University Office, the case went crashing...we were immediately called, as KCNSU executive members to be told that our concerns will be addressed...and Ambuje, they were - no court proceedings and the Lawyer, known to me personally, charged us nothing - That is what, Ambuje, positively crafty lawyers can do. I see that in the likes of Trevor Chimimba.
What is the essence of that background to Atcheya's story...let me
make it clear that I am one of those who think and deeply so that a
comeback of Atcheya onto the Presidency in Malawi is not, not even in the least sense, a good thing for the country...I can not think of anything positive that is motivating the "UDF's grassroots" into drafting Atcheya again, an idea Atcheya seems to be buying into... The idea, Ambuje, is to push home the fact that the Law is double edged.
Trevor and Hesse, Napoliyoni Dyanamite, Mukavango Buju, (and probably me) on one hand, you, Muthupo, Nyamainyameni, Melody Luhanga, MLK, on the other (may be Muthupo and me belong onto the centre, I am not sure) - all of us pushing onto this "constitutional rope) and when it snaps, the stronger and probably with the help of crafty Lawyers in our courts, will carry the day. When I come to that point, I always ask myself: "Who will have sufficient interest in this matter to commit it to our
Courts so it comes under litigation?" Who knows, I do not know and I do not want to know the answer to that question.
I doubt, very much, Ambuje, if this issue is about hatred or love for particular individual politicians - just that Atcheya comes too close to qualifying as having aroused questions about this area because of what I describe as "wild ambitions, political in nature."
As we debate the perceived constitutional shortfalls on this matter, my belief is that it goes beyond the constitution - an outrageous statement to make but probably necessary to advance my thinking on why the "Presidential comeback Project" soon to be undertaken by Atcheya if the UDF "grassroots" manage to convince him to comeback is futile, tragic and unreasonable for three main reasons and parties - Atcheya himself, the UDF and the Malawian people and it is the Malawian people I am greatly concerned about.
Atcheya - He may be heading for the biggest "showdown" of his
political career, it will be good, if he comes out victorious but, uuhuuuh, I do not want to think of this, if he comes out humbled, bruised and defeated, your guess as to what will have happened and will eventually happen is as good as mine. Politics can be dodgy and tricky and things do not always move in straight lines...Atcheya and his henchmen can take or leave this free piece of advice.
The UDF - The UDF has gone through a largely successful political
path until the following three projects were embarked on "the open terms bid, the third ("sad") Term bid and finally the Bingu Project. All these "projects" saw the UDF behaving like a headless chicken or a "cochroach placed in a hot pan" and in the process many of its prominent and dedicated members found it necessary to part ways with the party. As if this was not enough, these projects saw the ugly head of using the young people for selfish political objectives - we saw young democrats causing mayhem amidst the largely peaceful MALAWIAN people. And we can not, for a second, separate Atcheya from these projects...he was probably the "cause as well as the means" and what we see today (the ends) is as a result of that. Atcheya, embarking on a Presidential comeback project, may not end in a manner that may be good for the UDF - but hey, who can tell - it is Malawian politics at play here and surprises are not necessarily an exception.
The Malawian people - This is my main concern. The losers, when all
the battles will have been fought, will be the Malawian people. They may win very little, if any at all. Atcheya, if voted back in, will bring very little that we will be able to write about - we know what he did to the nation in his 1994 - 2004 period of (mis)rule. If he is not voted back in, after such an effortful bid to come back, his political opponents might hit back hard, in the process probably "burying his and UDF's" political path, robbing Malawians that cherish a successful UDF, without Atcheya, a party that they would love to succeed.
Further to this the distractions that Atcheya and UDF are causing to all of us and particularly the Government are not good for our
economic, social and political growth...Atcheya, as we speak, is attracting unnecessary attention and any politician, serious about curving a political agenda that is progressive, will not ignore the fact that a former president is on a bid to have another go at the presidency and particularly for a sitting president, who largely has to think of the business of running a government and it is the Malawian people who lose out...the President and his cronies are still drawing their salaries, allowances and benefits at the tax payers' expense, the Former President, in this case Dr Muluzi is drawing his pension without qualms, all MPs are and will continue to draw their salaries, allowances and other benefits, Lawyers and judges who may be involved in settling the raging legal battles that may emanate from this issue will cash in, huge sums of money - but in one way or another all these people will be, or indeed are concerned with the fact that a former president is attempting to come back and "rule" again - the losses to the Malawian people, in as far as a progressive developmental agenda is concerned, are immeasurable.
Atcheya needs to do the needful, tell the "UDF grassroots" who want
to draft him back in onto the presidential bid, that he appreciates
their trust and confidence but that he had his share of the cake already - and one can not eat his cake and have it too."
Isaac Cheke Ziba,
Livingston - Scotland.
What is the essence of that background to Atcheya's story...let me
make it clear that I am one of those who think and deeply so that a
comeback of Atcheya onto the Presidency in Malawi is not, not even in the least sense, a good thing for the country...I can not think of anything positive that is motivating the "UDF's grassroots" into drafting Atcheya again, an idea Atcheya seems to be buying into... The idea, Ambuje, is to push home the fact that the Law is double edged.
Trevor and Hesse, Napoliyoni Dyanamite, Mukavango Buju, (and probably me) on one hand, you, Muthupo, Nyamainyameni, Melody Luhanga, MLK, on the other (may be Muthupo and me belong onto the centre, I am not sure) - all of us pushing onto this "constitutional rope) and when it snaps, the stronger and probably with the help of crafty Lawyers in our courts, will carry the day. When I come to that point, I always ask myself: "Who will have sufficient interest in this matter to commit it to our
Courts so it comes under litigation?" Who knows, I do not know and I do not want to know the answer to that question.
I doubt, very much, Ambuje, if this issue is about hatred or love for particular individual politicians - just that Atcheya comes too close to qualifying as having aroused questions about this area because of what I describe as "wild ambitions, political in nature."
As we debate the perceived constitutional shortfalls on this matter, my belief is that it goes beyond the constitution - an outrageous statement to make but probably necessary to advance my thinking on why the "Presidential comeback Project" soon to be undertaken by Atcheya if the UDF "grassroots" manage to convince him to comeback is futile, tragic and unreasonable for three main reasons and parties - Atcheya himself, the UDF and the Malawian people and it is the Malawian people I am greatly concerned about.
Atcheya - He may be heading for the biggest "showdown" of his
political career, it will be good, if he comes out victorious but, uuhuuuh, I do not want to think of this, if he comes out humbled, bruised and defeated, your guess as to what will have happened and will eventually happen is as good as mine. Politics can be dodgy and tricky and things do not always move in straight lines...Atcheya and his henchmen can take or leave this free piece of advice.
The UDF - The UDF has gone through a largely successful political
path until the following three projects were embarked on "the open terms bid, the third ("sad") Term bid and finally the Bingu Project. All these "projects" saw the UDF behaving like a headless chicken or a "cochroach placed in a hot pan" and in the process many of its prominent and dedicated members found it necessary to part ways with the party. As if this was not enough, these projects saw the ugly head of using the young people for selfish political objectives - we saw young democrats causing mayhem amidst the largely peaceful MALAWIAN people. And we can not, for a second, separate Atcheya from these projects...he was probably the "cause as well as the means" and what we see today (the ends) is as a result of that. Atcheya, embarking on a Presidential comeback project, may not end in a manner that may be good for the UDF - but hey, who can tell - it is Malawian politics at play here and surprises are not necessarily an exception.
The Malawian people - This is my main concern. The losers, when all
the battles will have been fought, will be the Malawian people. They may win very little, if any at all. Atcheya, if voted back in, will bring very little that we will be able to write about - we know what he did to the nation in his 1994 - 2004 period of (mis)rule. If he is not voted back in, after such an effortful bid to come back, his political opponents might hit back hard, in the process probably "burying his and UDF's" political path, robbing Malawians that cherish a successful UDF, without Atcheya, a party that they would love to succeed.
Further to this the distractions that Atcheya and UDF are causing to all of us and particularly the Government are not good for our
economic, social and political growth...Atcheya, as we speak, is attracting unnecessary attention and any politician, serious about curving a political agenda that is progressive, will not ignore the fact that a former president is on a bid to have another go at the presidency and particularly for a sitting president, who largely has to think of the business of running a government and it is the Malawian people who lose out...the President and his cronies are still drawing their salaries, allowances and benefits at the tax payers' expense, the Former President, in this case Dr Muluzi is drawing his pension without qualms, all MPs are and will continue to draw their salaries, allowances and other benefits, Lawyers and judges who may be involved in settling the raging legal battles that may emanate from this issue will cash in, huge sums of money - but in one way or another all these people will be, or indeed are concerned with the fact that a former president is attempting to come back and "rule" again - the losses to the Malawian people, in as far as a progressive developmental agenda is concerned, are immeasurable.
Atcheya needs to do the needful, tell the "UDF grassroots" who want
to draft him back in onto the presidential bid, that he appreciates
their trust and confidence but that he had his share of the cake already - and one can not eat his cake and have it too."
Isaac Cheke Ziba,
Livingston - Scotland.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
UDF/ATCHEYA-BINGU FALLOUT - Who saved the nation?
I have kept thinking about this for a long time and I have decided to put "pen to paper" on it.
Where I come from, Mjinge Mhlaba Village, I grew up being told that "mwamuna, particularly mwana wa mNgoni, salira." I am not very sure if "chamuna")should be the word definitive of what the UDF found themselves in - was it by design or by default? (of course, tinaamva akuliralira – but then that was all, they could have gone further if so they wanted and willed – ena adakalirabe tikuamva, again, that is all they are doing.
When the leadership crisis strangled the UDF, full throttle, in the run-up to the 2004 Elections, the effects nearly descended on the whole nation, the failure to properly identify and democratically elect a leader in the UDF, translated to the Open terms bill, it further underwent a metamorphosis and became "the thinly veiled open terms but named third term." Young Democrats ran amok, they went on rampage, killing, maiming, beating, physically assaulting any person who was unwilling, unable or refused to sing the "ayimanso tune." Church leaders/elders to, were not spared the beating if they uttered a word against the "ayimanso saga." The Government, UDF led, used the Police machinery like their own security company, but hey, despite all this, Malawians remained resolute, determined to put at bay anything that resembled turning the hands on the clock towards the 31 years of MCP's brutal rule - the open terms, later on turned the 3rd term bill got defeated, crashed by a robust Parliament - an emerging Democracy saw its worst days. Thanks to our Parliament then and particularly the few MPs within the UDF who saw no sense in putting Bakili Muluzi on a course that would have seen him around as Malawi's president for time on end, probably till he became demented, like HKB did. Some political jobs were or were about to be lost…Chihana’s power base shrunk at an increasing rate, JZU quickly reversed his support for the same after noticing that the Malawian voter was in an uncompromising mood on this issue, Churches were divided on the issue – Atcheya sat back, watched all the drama as if it had nothing to do with him – politics at its best…at least in our part of the world.
After the Nation said no to the infamous open terms and third term bills, the leadership crisis in the UDF went back to the confines of the Party and there, heads were going to roll, and roll they did, particularly those that were seen to be harbouring some leadership ambitions and not having put enough effort to push through the infamous open terms/third term bills - Harry Thomson went, Justin Chimera Malewezi went, Aleke Kadonaphani Banda went, Brown J. Mpinganjira went, Joseph Makhumula went and so many other prominent party members fell out of grace with the reigning powers in the party at the time.
One other thing contributed to all this UDF party "disintegration." - a new name seemed to be making rounds for a possible take over of the Party leadership - Bingu wa Muntharika...some party gurus made it clear they did not want the "new chap in the block" others supported the idea purely because Atcheya anena and yet others were standing on the fence, if BwM comes in, he should not see us as having been on this side or the other...at the end of the day, the "new chap" took over the UDF leadership mantle...very few people clapped hands, very few people gave the chap any chance of winning the election, some UDfers even went to the extent of saying the "product was unsellable therefore very difficult to market." Atcheya, though, was determined, campaigned for this product through and through, criss-crossing the country at will, what with state resources available at his simple whim and fancy, including "free" airwave coverage by both TVM and MBC...came the election, despite other parties not agreeing, BwM was elected President of Malawi on a UDF ticket, thrashing Vincent Gwandangulube Chakuamba, many circles thought he was the favourite, into the 3rd position, with JZU on second. Opinions are as diverse as one can think of on who really must have won the 2004 Presidential elections - some say JZU was the rightful winner, they have their own reasons, others say Gwanda should have carried the day, they have their own reasons and yet others believe BwM won in genuine terms.
The Nation could now progress...but wait a minute, AKB, running mate to Gwnada declared the "Mgwirizano Coalition" winner and saw the opening of a case in our courts on the same, JZU was grumbling too, but he was "swimming his waters very carefully, as he has always been when it comes to issues of elections, not necessarily refusing that elections were rigged but also not necessarily willing to contest the case if he was not the one considered the winner - eventually the case went crashing...
Meanwhile the UDF was preparing for another five years of Government...starting with a grand inauguration of the President – Bingu wa muntharika was the name and indeed, Chichiri stadium was going to be the venue, heavy police presence was witnessed. When all seemed "nice and sweet", BwM stood up to speak, and the fact that he was going to be his own man was very evident from his touching inaugural speech - he departed very sharply from what we used to hear from the UDF top brass for 10 years - many who thought BwM had nothing to offer changed their hearts when the speech came to the last full stop...war on corruption, Malawi is not poor, a robust civil service, a lean cabinet, fiscal discipline - all the things a Malawian would have loved to hear from his/her leader came out of Bingu's mouth...of course in his inaugural speech…as to whether he has walked his inaugural talk, Malawians are the best judge on the matter…as for me, at least I do not consider the cabinet “lean” a it stands as we speak.
An immediate relocation from Sanjika Palace to the New State House (some ask when will it become aged and no longer new?), jitters within and in the UDF could be felt from the outside world - a new order was taking shape in our country - good or bad who could tell at that time and as we speak, who can tell in real terms whether it was/is good or bad - opinions continue to vary and I think that will be the case till time on end.
The cabinet, Bingu's first, took close to three weeks to be put in place - conspiracy theorists believe and say, Atcheya had already come up with the Cabinet which he wanted BwM to endorse wholesale and BwM refused...conspirancy theorists continue to propagate the notion that Atcheya wanted to continue ruling through Bingu – Chichewa chake “kufuna kumayimba nawo belu, munthu ali pakaliyala.” If that was the dream within the UDF, Bingu was having none of it.
Much as we, as a nation could not place a finger on it at that time, the Malawian people could tell though, that something was not right in and within the UDF with Bingu in the equation. Being a product - Bingu wa Muntarika and the Sponsor - the UDF...parallel lines seemed to be emerging between the two - either of the two needed, very very quickly, to comply with the other and it seemed none was prepared for the "compliance" and the biggest political fall out saw its birth, the UDF sponsored BwM, announced his departure from the UDF and a few days later, Democratic Progressive Party, shortened to DPP - was born - what a hell of a situation, come to think of it...
My biggest concern in this article, though, is the events that followed...UDF was up in arms demanding BwM's blood - I totally understand and understood them, BwM was up in arms declaring UDF a corrupt party, UDF went further and acknowledged having rigged the elections in favour of Bingu - total mayhem for a Nation dying for good governance, real stability and economic progress...BwM was treading where "angels" (with a small "A") would have feared to do the same...he was, predictably, going to have a rough ride with his duty to govern a people of Malawi and he had and I think he still has...THAT ROUGH RIDE.
Now, that we seem to have put all that behind us (I assume), who has averted a major disaster from besetting our country - the UDFor BwM - I am sure views on this issue can be, will be and are varied depending on which part of the elephant you are holding on to. As for this citizen of Malawi, each party has had a role to play in bringing about the mess and they have had a role to play in making sure it does not escalate to something sinister - issues of capacity could be at stake as well, one can never know for certain.
Much as the UDF seemed, at some point, to have drunk from the cup of hatred and bitterness with all these political machinations, they fell short, probably in a positive way, of employing the tactics they used to fight for the maturation of the open and third term bills - particularly the YDs aspect, to throw the nation into turmoil; and Bingu, despite all the "resources" he may have access to, DID NOT USE, has not used EITHER, brutal force against the people who have constantly campaigned for his downfall particularly the UDF. He has instead, for valid or just political reasons, tried to use the legal set up to try and bring down most of his enemies…of course some of them still survive as we speak
We are a nation in need of leadership, we are a nation in dire straits, we are a nation in economic doldrums, we can not afford a political game that yields no results, we can not afford to keep on going and not improve the quality of life of our people - each one of us, particularly our political leaders - in government or in opposition have a role in forging a pure developmental agenda for the whole nation, if development fails, all of us fail, development fails, Malawians will continue to live on less than a dollar a day, development fails, we fail our people and terribly so...
We can not keep on like this - there has to be a time for politicking but there has to be time for political leadership delivery, good delivery, i am talking about which entails development for Malawi which has to translate to development, in real terms, for our people.
2007, has to be a year, all of us should tell ourselves and our neighbour, for a Malawi that is on course to brighter future and a better today.
In conclusion, let me say this – thoughts purely shaped from the thoughts of martin Luther King jr: -
It is no longer time for political leadership to be issuing bad cheques in as far as our development is concerned as a people. Time is up for development cheques given to our people by the political leadership to come back marked “insufficient funds, it is no longer time for the Malawian people to always get raw deals from “scrupulous” people feigning possession of good political leadership, when in fact, it is themselves the really care about.” Malawians will soon, be coming to their nationa’s capital to cash their cheque and it wil not be good enough to find insufficient funds in their development purse, they will not accept that as a fact because they know the potential that Malawi possesses on their behalf – it is about leadership.
The storm is coming; it may not be long from now…be on the lookout.
Isaac Cheke Ziba
Livingston - Scotland.
Where I come from, Mjinge Mhlaba Village, I grew up being told that "mwamuna, particularly mwana wa mNgoni, salira." I am not very sure if "chamuna")should be the word definitive of what the UDF found themselves in - was it by design or by default? (of course, tinaamva akuliralira – but then that was all, they could have gone further if so they wanted and willed – ena adakalirabe tikuamva, again, that is all they are doing.
When the leadership crisis strangled the UDF, full throttle, in the run-up to the 2004 Elections, the effects nearly descended on the whole nation, the failure to properly identify and democratically elect a leader in the UDF, translated to the Open terms bill, it further underwent a metamorphosis and became "the thinly veiled open terms but named third term." Young Democrats ran amok, they went on rampage, killing, maiming, beating, physically assaulting any person who was unwilling, unable or refused to sing the "ayimanso tune." Church leaders/elders to, were not spared the beating if they uttered a word against the "ayimanso saga." The Government, UDF led, used the Police machinery like their own security company, but hey, despite all this, Malawians remained resolute, determined to put at bay anything that resembled turning the hands on the clock towards the 31 years of MCP's brutal rule - the open terms, later on turned the 3rd term bill got defeated, crashed by a robust Parliament - an emerging Democracy saw its worst days. Thanks to our Parliament then and particularly the few MPs within the UDF who saw no sense in putting Bakili Muluzi on a course that would have seen him around as Malawi's president for time on end, probably till he became demented, like HKB did. Some political jobs were or were about to be lost…Chihana’s power base shrunk at an increasing rate, JZU quickly reversed his support for the same after noticing that the Malawian voter was in an uncompromising mood on this issue, Churches were divided on the issue – Atcheya sat back, watched all the drama as if it had nothing to do with him – politics at its best…at least in our part of the world.
After the Nation said no to the infamous open terms and third term bills, the leadership crisis in the UDF went back to the confines of the Party and there, heads were going to roll, and roll they did, particularly those that were seen to be harbouring some leadership ambitions and not having put enough effort to push through the infamous open terms/third term bills - Harry Thomson went, Justin Chimera Malewezi went, Aleke Kadonaphani Banda went, Brown J. Mpinganjira went, Joseph Makhumula went and so many other prominent party members fell out of grace with the reigning powers in the party at the time.
One other thing contributed to all this UDF party "disintegration." - a new name seemed to be making rounds for a possible take over of the Party leadership - Bingu wa Muntharika...some party gurus made it clear they did not want the "new chap in the block" others supported the idea purely because Atcheya anena and yet others were standing on the fence, if BwM comes in, he should not see us as having been on this side or the other...at the end of the day, the "new chap" took over the UDF leadership mantle...very few people clapped hands, very few people gave the chap any chance of winning the election, some UDfers even went to the extent of saying the "product was unsellable therefore very difficult to market." Atcheya, though, was determined, campaigned for this product through and through, criss-crossing the country at will, what with state resources available at his simple whim and fancy, including "free" airwave coverage by both TVM and MBC...came the election, despite other parties not agreeing, BwM was elected President of Malawi on a UDF ticket, thrashing Vincent Gwandangulube Chakuamba, many circles thought he was the favourite, into the 3rd position, with JZU on second. Opinions are as diverse as one can think of on who really must have won the 2004 Presidential elections - some say JZU was the rightful winner, they have their own reasons, others say Gwanda should have carried the day, they have their own reasons and yet others believe BwM won in genuine terms.
The Nation could now progress...but wait a minute, AKB, running mate to Gwnada declared the "Mgwirizano Coalition" winner and saw the opening of a case in our courts on the same, JZU was grumbling too, but he was "swimming his waters very carefully, as he has always been when it comes to issues of elections, not necessarily refusing that elections were rigged but also not necessarily willing to contest the case if he was not the one considered the winner - eventually the case went crashing...
Meanwhile the UDF was preparing for another five years of Government...starting with a grand inauguration of the President – Bingu wa muntharika was the name and indeed, Chichiri stadium was going to be the venue, heavy police presence was witnessed. When all seemed "nice and sweet", BwM stood up to speak, and the fact that he was going to be his own man was very evident from his touching inaugural speech - he departed very sharply from what we used to hear from the UDF top brass for 10 years - many who thought BwM had nothing to offer changed their hearts when the speech came to the last full stop...war on corruption, Malawi is not poor, a robust civil service, a lean cabinet, fiscal discipline - all the things a Malawian would have loved to hear from his/her leader came out of Bingu's mouth...of course in his inaugural speech…as to whether he has walked his inaugural talk, Malawians are the best judge on the matter…as for me, at least I do not consider the cabinet “lean” a it stands as we speak.
An immediate relocation from Sanjika Palace to the New State House (some ask when will it become aged and no longer new?), jitters within and in the UDF could be felt from the outside world - a new order was taking shape in our country - good or bad who could tell at that time and as we speak, who can tell in real terms whether it was/is good or bad - opinions continue to vary and I think that will be the case till time on end.
The cabinet, Bingu's first, took close to three weeks to be put in place - conspiracy theorists believe and say, Atcheya had already come up with the Cabinet which he wanted BwM to endorse wholesale and BwM refused...conspirancy theorists continue to propagate the notion that Atcheya wanted to continue ruling through Bingu – Chichewa chake “kufuna kumayimba nawo belu, munthu ali pakaliyala.” If that was the dream within the UDF, Bingu was having none of it.
Much as we, as a nation could not place a finger on it at that time, the Malawian people could tell though, that something was not right in and within the UDF with Bingu in the equation. Being a product - Bingu wa Muntarika and the Sponsor - the UDF...parallel lines seemed to be emerging between the two - either of the two needed, very very quickly, to comply with the other and it seemed none was prepared for the "compliance" and the biggest political fall out saw its birth, the UDF sponsored BwM, announced his departure from the UDF and a few days later, Democratic Progressive Party, shortened to DPP - was born - what a hell of a situation, come to think of it...
My biggest concern in this article, though, is the events that followed...UDF was up in arms demanding BwM's blood - I totally understand and understood them, BwM was up in arms declaring UDF a corrupt party, UDF went further and acknowledged having rigged the elections in favour of Bingu - total mayhem for a Nation dying for good governance, real stability and economic progress...BwM was treading where "angels" (with a small "A") would have feared to do the same...he was, predictably, going to have a rough ride with his duty to govern a people of Malawi and he had and I think he still has...THAT ROUGH RIDE.
Now, that we seem to have put all that behind us (I assume), who has averted a major disaster from besetting our country - the UDFor BwM - I am sure views on this issue can be, will be and are varied depending on which part of the elephant you are holding on to. As for this citizen of Malawi, each party has had a role to play in bringing about the mess and they have had a role to play in making sure it does not escalate to something sinister - issues of capacity could be at stake as well, one can never know for certain.
Much as the UDF seemed, at some point, to have drunk from the cup of hatred and bitterness with all these political machinations, they fell short, probably in a positive way, of employing the tactics they used to fight for the maturation of the open and third term bills - particularly the YDs aspect, to throw the nation into turmoil; and Bingu, despite all the "resources" he may have access to, DID NOT USE, has not used EITHER, brutal force against the people who have constantly campaigned for his downfall particularly the UDF. He has instead, for valid or just political reasons, tried to use the legal set up to try and bring down most of his enemies…of course some of them still survive as we speak
We are a nation in need of leadership, we are a nation in dire straits, we are a nation in economic doldrums, we can not afford a political game that yields no results, we can not afford to keep on going and not improve the quality of life of our people - each one of us, particularly our political leaders - in government or in opposition have a role in forging a pure developmental agenda for the whole nation, if development fails, all of us fail, development fails, Malawians will continue to live on less than a dollar a day, development fails, we fail our people and terribly so...
We can not keep on like this - there has to be a time for politicking but there has to be time for political leadership delivery, good delivery, i am talking about which entails development for Malawi which has to translate to development, in real terms, for our people.
2007, has to be a year, all of us should tell ourselves and our neighbour, for a Malawi that is on course to brighter future and a better today.
In conclusion, let me say this – thoughts purely shaped from the thoughts of martin Luther King jr: -
It is no longer time for political leadership to be issuing bad cheques in as far as our development is concerned as a people. Time is up for development cheques given to our people by the political leadership to come back marked “insufficient funds, it is no longer time for the Malawian people to always get raw deals from “scrupulous” people feigning possession of good political leadership, when in fact, it is themselves the really care about.” Malawians will soon, be coming to their nationa’s capital to cash their cheque and it wil not be good enough to find insufficient funds in their development purse, they will not accept that as a fact because they know the potential that Malawi possesses on their behalf – it is about leadership.
The storm is coming; it may not be long from now…be on the lookout.
Isaac Cheke Ziba
Livingston - Scotland.
Monday, January 15, 2007
REMEMBERING MARTIN LUTHER KING Jr
Dr. Steve Sharra, you have beaten e to it and in a very admirable manner…keep it going. The World has big lessons to learn from the great American who lived to the fullest the ideals of a useful, moral life and what he believed in needs to be held true to this day.
My tow tambala worth thoughts on this man are below: -
If America wants to be a first class Nation, it can not afford to have second class citizens…Martin Luther King Jr.
For today, the world needs to tell itself that it can not afford to have second class human beings if the world is to be at peace, if the world is to be good enough for qualitative inhabitation of all people – the world can not manage to default on this, if it does, we may as well forget about a world where even the affluent societies live a meaningful, peaceful life because the poverty, the suffering, the suspicion with which the less privileged citizens of the world get treated to will continue to haunt each one of us in equal measure, and it does not matter what measure that takes.
The World, especially the staggeringly affluent societies, can not just look on and ignore the suffering, poverty, hunger disease etc that continue to cripple the “Kuphukira kwa Africa” as Dr Steve Sharra wants Africa to do. There are not many, as should be the case, success stories in Asia and the Middle East either.
Listen to the inspiring speeches by Martin Luther King Jr by following the link below:
http://www.drmartinlutherkingjr.com
Some Yahoo readers who have listened to the “I have a dream speech” have had the following comments: -
User Reviews
Read all reviews
• Grat speech
01/15/2007by jmcrespi
Great speech indeed. The main points of Mr.King, if applied by current societies would solve many of the problems that humanity is facing. However, notice that Mr.King talks about equalities...Yes, equalities, not supremacy of ones above the others...so all those that use Mr.King s words to stress on their crusades but then wear T-shirts with slogans such as Coffe? Black please, it tastes better ...double think about it.
• Thank you!
01/15/2007by laura_ulmeanu2000
You have the most wonderful idea. Bravo. It s so great to leasen the speech not only to read it. Thank you again.
• Dream...
01/15/2007by pleasantoakb
thanks Yahoo!!! great concept...
• The Greatest Speech Ever
01/15/2007by touretech
Thank you YAHOO, for sharing this with the World. In my opinion, this is one of if not the GREATEST Speech for Humanity and Peace, and should be appreciated and remembered by all humans. If we live with this goal in focus, many of our ills and wars in society will end.
My tow tambala worth thoughts on this man are below: -
If America wants to be a first class Nation, it can not afford to have second class citizens…Martin Luther King Jr.
For today, the world needs to tell itself that it can not afford to have second class human beings if the world is to be at peace, if the world is to be good enough for qualitative inhabitation of all people – the world can not manage to default on this, if it does, we may as well forget about a world where even the affluent societies live a meaningful, peaceful life because the poverty, the suffering, the suspicion with which the less privileged citizens of the world get treated to will continue to haunt each one of us in equal measure, and it does not matter what measure that takes.
The World, especially the staggeringly affluent societies, can not just look on and ignore the suffering, poverty, hunger disease etc that continue to cripple the “Kuphukira kwa Africa” as Dr Steve Sharra wants Africa to do. There are not many, as should be the case, success stories in Asia and the Middle East either.
Listen to the inspiring speeches by Martin Luther King Jr by following the link below:
http://www.drmartinlutherkingjr.com
Some Yahoo readers who have listened to the “I have a dream speech” have had the following comments: -
User Reviews
Read all reviews
• Grat speech
01/15/2007by jmcrespi
Great speech indeed. The main points of Mr.King, if applied by current societies would solve many of the problems that humanity is facing. However, notice that Mr.King talks about equalities...Yes, equalities, not supremacy of ones above the others...so all those that use Mr.King s words to stress on their crusades but then wear T-shirts with slogans such as Coffe? Black please, it tastes better ...double think about it.
• Thank you!
01/15/2007by laura_ulmeanu2000
You have the most wonderful idea. Bravo. It s so great to leasen the speech not only to read it. Thank you again.
• Dream...
01/15/2007by pleasantoakb
thanks Yahoo!!! great concept...
• The Greatest Speech Ever
01/15/2007by touretech
Thank you YAHOO, for sharing this with the World. In my opinion, this is one of if not the GREATEST Speech for Humanity and Peace, and should be appreciated and remembered by all humans. If we live with this goal in focus, many of our ills and wars in society will end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
