Africa News blog

Australia worse than Africa for mining? Yikes!: Clyde

By Clyde Russell The idea that Australia is a more dangerous place for mining investment than Mali might seem strange to most observers, but that’s exactly the view of the boss of the world’s third-biggest gold producer. Mark Cutifani, the chief executive officer of AngloGold Ashanti, said last week he was more concerned about government policies toward mining in Australia than about nationalism in Africa. On the face of it, this is an extraordinary comment that has gone largely unreported by both the Australian and international media. How can it possibly be that Australia, a stable Western democracy with rule of law, independent courts and a culture of vigorous debate, is a more risky place than countries like Mali, which had a military coup last month and is battling an insurgency by Tuareg separatists? Of course, it may be that Cutifani, an Australian-born mining engineer who has headed the Johannesburg-based company since October 2007, was ramping up the rhetoric to make a point when he talked to reporters on March 27 in Perth, capital of the resource-rich state of Western Australia. But this would appear to be at odds with his previous record of speaking sensibly about the gold-mining industry while remaining an advocate of the interests of his global company. The point Cutifani was probably trying to drive home is that the debate in Australia over its vast mineral resources appears to have veered off-track and descended into political point-scoring. “The politicians and we as industry leaders are missing each other,” the Australian Associated Press quoted him as saying. “Somehow, we’ve got to land this discussion and stop the class warfare-type conversations and turn the conversations into constructive dialogue about the future of the country and the industry.” To be fair, Cutifani has also lobbied against proposals for a resource rent tax in South Africa and moves to raise taxes in other African countries where AngloGold operates, such as Ghana and Mali. But for Australia, the background to his comments is an intensifying war of words between Wayne Swan, the treasurer in the Labor Party-led minority government, and mining magnates over the new Mineral Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) and the carbon tax. Both these taxes are due to start on July 1 and have raised the ire of many industries and the opposition Liberal Party.

The MRRT will impose a 30 percent levy on so-called super profits of large coal and iron ore, and doesn’t yet include other producers such as gold miners. The carbon tax will impose a price of A$23 on the emissions of the top 500 polluters, to be phased in, while reducing income taxes for poorer households in order to offset the expected increase in energy costs. The Labor Party, which has slumped in opinion polls partly over public disquiet over the new taxes and a broken promise not to introduce a carbon tax by Prime Minister Julia Gillard, appears to be following the tactic of stoking the politics of envy as a distraction method. Since the financial crisis that sparked the global recession in 2008 it has been easy for politicians to attack the rich and blame untrammeled greed for the economic carnage. In Australia, the target is billionaire mining barons and Swan attacked iron ore magnates Gina Rinehart and Andrew Forrest as well as coal developer Clive Palmer in an essay published last month. Interestingly enough, Swan didn’t attack BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, the two global miners that led initial opposition to a stiffer resource tax that was watered down after Gillard deposed former prime minister Kevin Rudd in a party-room coup. Swan accused the billionaires of trying to use their wealth to “distort public policy,” apparently without any sense of irony, given that he was using his position as the second-most powerful politician in Australia to do the same. It seems to me that Australia would benefit from a more sensible debate on how to ensure the mineral wealth is developed in a way that rewards the owners of capital that take the risks of developing projects as well the overall economy and citizens in general. Debate in Australia appears to be driven by short-term political cycles, with federal elections every three years leading politicians to focus more on spin than sound policies. Is the MRRT the best design that could have been implemented? Will it raise sufficient revenue without leading to less investment, and will it help ensure the long-term viability of mining? Should the revenue it raises be used to fund a one percentage point cut in the company tax rate, as Labor proposes, or would it be better put toward building a sovereign wealth fund? These are all valid points for debate, but aren’t getting a hearing in Australia currently. Instead, as AngloGold’s Cutifani pointed out, there is an unedifying mud-slinging match that does little to enhance the reputations of either Swan or his targets.

Has Kenya learned from the 2007/2008 post-election violence?

By Isaac Esipisu

Kenya is set to hold in December of this year its first elections since the 2007 vote that was marred by deadly violence. The east African country’s election will come under intense scrutiny because it will be the first under a new constitution and the first since the 2007 poll in which more than 1,220 people were killed, mostly in post-election violence.

The bloodshed and property destruction were unprecedented. Many Kenyans were rendered homeless as well; many as I write are still leaving as internally displaced persons (IDPs)

The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor later named six people suspected of bearing the greatest responsibility for the post-election violence in 2007. The ICC’s move was viewed by optimists as the end of the country’s culture of impunity, but pessimists feared it could spark a new round of ethnic blood-letting.

Proponents of the Hague process see it as the only way of achieving justice in a country where those in high office have never been brought to account for their actions

Later this year ICC announced cases of crimes against humanity against four out of the six suspected, including two top presidential contenders — Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto. It has been argued that Kenyatta and Ruto cannot contest the presidency after being charged by the ICC with crimes against humanity.

100 years and going strong; But has the ANC-led government done enough for its people?

By Isaac Esipisu

Although the role of political parties in Africa has changed dramatically since the sweeping reintroduction of multi-party politics in the early 1990s, Africa’s political parties remain deficient in many ways, particularly their organizational capacity, programmatic profiles and inner-party democracy.

The third wave of democratization that hit the shores of Africa 20 years ago has undoubtedly produced mixed results as regards to the democratic quality of the over 48 countries south of the Sahara. However, one finding can hardly be denied: the role of political parties has evidently changed dramatically.

Notwithstanding few exceptions such as Eritrea , Swaziland and Somalia , in almost all sub-Saharan countries, governments legally allow multi-party politics. This is in stark contrast to the single-party regimes and military oligarchies that prevailed before 1990.

After years of marginalization during autocratic rule, many African political parties have regained their key role in democratic politics by mediating between politics and society. Multi-partyism paved the way for genuine parliamentary opposition and the strengthening of parliaments in decision-making. However, several shortcomings still remain: many African political parties suffer from low organizational capacity and a lack of internal democracy.

Dominated by individual leaders, often times lifelong chairpersons and “Big Men”, youth and women remain marginalized within party structures.

Will 2012 see more strong men of Africa leave office?

By Isaac Esipisu

There are many reasons for being angry with Africa ’s strong men, whose autocratic ways have thrust some African countries back into the eye of the storm and threatened to undo the democratic gains in other parts of the continent of the past decades.

For those who made ultimate political capital from opposing strongman rule in their respective countries, it is a chilling commentary of African politics that several leaders now seek to cement their places and refusing to retire and watch the upcoming elections from the sidelines, or refusing to hand over power after losing presidential elections.

In 2012 one of the longest strong men of Africa, President Abdoulaye Wade’s country Senegal is holding its presidential elections together with other countries like Sierra Leon, Mali, Mauritania, Malagasy, and will be shortly followed by Zimbabwe and Kenya.

Yoweri Museveni and Paul Biya of Cameroon , who are among the longest-ruling leaders of the Africa , won their respective presidential elections and continue to have a stronghold on their respective countries, albeit with charges raised of serious election malpractice. Eduardo Dos Santos of Angola, Denis Sassou Nguesso of Congo Republic and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe will in one or two years face the electorate in an effort to further cement their authoritarian leadership.

What happened in the second half of 2011 in North Africa and more specifically in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya does not seem to have had any kind of effect on other Sub-Saharan African Leaders.  In fact, they have strengthened their stronghold on power and in some countries even harassed and jailed opposition leaders.

Ready for elections in Ivory Coast and Guinea?

Barring last-minute upsets, Ivory Coast will go to the polls on Sunday, marking the end of a five-year limbo in which the incumbent president has ruled without any real mandate and the country stagnated without a sense of identity or direction.

The following weekend, neighbouring Guinea may finally hold the serially delayed second-round of its presidential election, hoped to end nearly two years of military rule whose defining moment was a massacre of pro-democracy marchers by the security forces in a sports stadium.

It can only be a good thing if the elections allow Ivory Coast and Guinea to draw a line under their past and move on. But is either country actually ready for them?

In Guinea any semblance of voting on a candidate’s policy proposals or merits has been jettisoned after June’s first round which, to no great surprise, set the stage for a run-off between Cellou Dallein Diallo and Alpha Conde — representatives of the large Peul and Malinke communities respectively.

Instead of hearing a meaningful political debate before the decisive second round, Guinean voters have watched a struggle for control of the national election commission, with both sides afraid of it falling into the hands of the rival ethnic group.

The stand-off was only solved by appointing a Malian as the temporary president of the body.

Things are only marginally better in Ivory Coast. One candidate, ex-premier and former IMF deputy chief Alassane Ouattara, declared this week there is “no way” that President Laurent Gbagbo could win the election, effectively pre-empting the choice of the Ivorian voter.

Hopes of a nation hinge on a document

On July 7, 1990, fear spread around Kenya. It stretched from the capital, where the opposition had called demonstrations to press for a multi-party system and constitutional changes, right into rural areas.

When a lorry carrying packed milk, under a now long-discarded school-feeding scheme, approached a rural schoolyard during a break, schoolchildren ran into their classrooms because the black stacked crates looked suspiciously like the helmets of armed police.

Some schoolchildren were picked up by their parents from school, too anxious about their safety to let them stay in school.

Opposition leaders and their supporters were beaten up and arrested on the streets by police, forcing some to flee into foreign embassies and into exile in the ensuing crackdown by security forces.

Two decades later,  a new constitution is being enacted. It could guarantee the survival of the country by protecting it from intermittent ethnic conflict, a political establishment susceptible to abuse, corruption and the skewed distribution of resources such as land.

The road to this point, for many people, was peppered with heartbreak, because several times the promise of a new constitution and the much-needed new start turned out to be false dawn.

For instance, in 2002, euphoria swept the country with the election of President Mwai Kibaki who, among other promises, ran on a platform of delivering a new constitution within a 100 days of election.

Nigeria’s Jonathan flying high

Would you order three new jets just so your successor could use them?

President Goodluck Jonathan is keeping Nigerians guessing as to whether he plans to stand in elections due next January, but suspicions are growing that he will eventually decide to contest.

Plans he has set out range from boosting power supply – perhaps Nigeria’s most critical need – to improving roads. Those are certainly not projects that anyone could complete quickly. On Wednesday, cabinet approved the purchase of three presidential jets at a cost of $150 million – adding to the suspicions he sees himself making use of them.

But there remains the question of Nigeria’s careful ethnic political dance. Jonathan must win over northerners who believe they deserve another turn at the presidency because late President Umaru Yar’Adua, a Muslim northerner, died in office. In another possible sign of Jonathan trying to win favour in the north, he appointed two female opposition members from the region to his cabinet this week.

It can’t be easy for anyone who becomes president to turn down the chance to stay in office – particularly at the urging of supporters constantly assuring you that you can do the job better than anyone else.

Do you see the signs leading to Jonathan staying in office next year? Or could the government be trying to spend what it can in the limited time it may have to run?

South Africa’s birthday party that isn’t

It is exactly one hundred years today since the formation of the Union of South Africa, but there are no signs of celebration over that. What exactly is the Union, you might ask? On May 31 1910, the southern part of Africa that is today known as the Republic of South Africa became a unitary state under British dominion in pretty much the geographical shape which exists to this day.

Given that for most South Africans, history from 1910 until the end of white minority rule in 1994 was one of exclusion and oppression there may be understandable reasons why it is not a date to be accompanied by mass celebrations.

 But is that any reason why it should be forgotten? Hasn’t South Africa changed enough in 16 years that all races could see it as an important enough date in their common history to want to mark it?

 Giving his State of the Nation speech earlier this year, President Jacob Zuma noted the upcoming anniversary and the fact that the exclusion of black people in the Union led to the formation of the African National Congress in 1912. 

“We should reflect on how far we have travelled as a country,” he said..

 But is anybody really doing that with the soccer World Cup just 10 days away? And is it a day that South Africans should recognize as part of their collective history?  Like them or not, there is no escaping the facts of South Africa’s history.

Happy Union Day if it means anything to you.

One step forward, a few steps back

One of the few positives of Sudan’s elections, dubbed to be the first open vote in 24 years but marred by opposition boycotts and accusations of fraud, was a tiny opening of democratic freedom in Africa’s largest country.

Direct press censorship was lifted from Sudan’s papers and opposition politicians were given an albeit limited platform to address the population through state media.

Still, it seemed for the biggest international observer missions, such as the Carter Center and the European Union, the best they could say about the elections was 1): That they happened and 2): That people were not killing each other for once in this nation devastated by decades of multiple civil wars. (At least not because of the vote anyway).

They all agreed that the crack of democracy opened during the polls must be allowed to continue. And more progressive members of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir’s ruling party agreed. Presidential Adviser Ghazi Salaheddin told me he did not think they could go back on the democratic gains.

But it seems just one month after the vote, Sudan is sliding back to its old ways.

In Darfur, where Bashir is accused by the International Criminal Court of war crimes and crimes against humanity, the Sudanese army took control of West Darfur’s Jabel Moun – which has been a key rebel stronghold pretty much since the conflict began in 2003.

It’s an impressive range of hills making it an ideal base to defend against attack. It’s also an area where the U.N.-African Union peacekeeping mission (UNAMID) has enjoyed little access because of almost constant military clashes and bombing.

Yar’Adua death leaves succession wide open

The death of Nigerian President Umaru Yar’Adua is unlikely to plunge Africa’s most populous state into crisis, but it intensifies what was already shaping up to be the fiercest succession race since the end of military rule.

Yar’Adua has been absent from the political scene since last November, when he left for medical treatment in Saudi Arabia, and his deputy Goodluck Jonathan has been running the country since February and has since consolidated his position.

Yar’Adua’s death now piles pressure on the powerbrokers in the ruling People’s Democratic Party to resolve the impasse over who should succeed him.

According to the party’s constitution, power should rotate between Nigeria’s geographical zones, and there is an unwritten agreement that the presidency should alternate between the Muslim north and Christian south every two terms.

The conventional thinking was that should Yar’Adua — a northerner — die during his first term, as has happened, Jonathan — a southerner — would pick a new northern vice president and the pair would finish the unexpired term.

That northern vice president would then stand as the ruling party’s presidential nominee in the next election.

A string of northern names has been bandied around in the media and by political analysts as possible candidates to serve with Jonathan and then run at the next election.