There was this interesting story of a boy who was preparing for a crucial examination. On the excuse of no funds from his parents, this boy had to go to school every day poorly fed.
In the evenings, because of the same excuse of no funds, the poor boy could not get access to electricity to prepare himself adequately for the following day’s work. As a form of encouragement or is it incentive, this boy’s parents promised him fantastic money and even added a brand new pair of shoes if he should come out with flying colours.
Where was this money hiding when the boy desperately needed good food to nourish his brain? Where were those caring parents when this boy was compelled to strain his eyes to read in the dark? You cannot cheat, so as was expected, the boy failed miserably in the examination. That brilliant needy child is called Ghana Sports.
We want to reap where we have not sown; so we went to Beijing only to inflate the numbers. Our national anthem did not boom in the stadium loud speakers and the national flag of Red, Gold and Green with the majestic Black Star in the middle could not unfurl in the cool Beijing breeze. Another international event has come to an abysmal end with the failure (or refusal?) of Vida Anim to do the 200 metres dash for her country.
Our athletes and boxers to the games, like dry leaves in the harmattan, fell one after the other without reaching the medal zone. I saw athletes from all places, including war-torn Sudan, running faster, soaring higher, hitting harder and stretching longer, but where was Ghana, the country that held so much hope for Black Africa at independence? Where are all those talents which once made Ghana the most powerful boxing nation in the Commonwealth?
In a belated move, as if fully knowing very well that that money will never be spent, the government promised our athletes some mouth-watering cash rewards, if they should make it to the medal zone. Check it; US$25,000 for Gold, US$20,000 for Silver and US$15,000 for Bronze. As could be expected, the state coffers have been spared the cash, because you do not come home with game, if you carry a gun without bullets. We were not part of the winning team. We were only part of the team in the true spirit of the Olympic Games. But should that be our consolation?
The amazing thing is that any time we need money for something that will bring honour to this country, we always get tonnes of excuses. Chief among them is the proverbial No Fund syndrome. We have enough to pay people who drive all day long doing nothing profitable but we cannot groom our athletes to make this nation proud on the international circuit. We also have a taxpayer’s burden in the form of a bureaucratic apparatus called the Ministry responsible for Sports, yet our performance in the field is not worth bothering our heads about.
When I saw Usain Bolt of Jamaica, like thunderbolt crossing the line in both the 100 metres and 200 metres in record times, I knew we cannot blame Nature for our failures. Here was a man, whose great grandfathers might have been captured from the thick tropical forests of Africa to begin a life of slavery in the Americas, running like a hare. That means when it comes to raw talents, we have them in abundance.
Bolt was not alone. There were a lot of other Blacks of African descent running or doing other events in the colours of great nations like the United States of America (USA), Great Britain, Canada, Brazil and France.
Apart from them the performance of other Black sportsmen and sportswomen from Jamaica, Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago and Cuba proves that the problem is not about talents but how you process those talents.
Other African countries did not go there as ordinary spectators. Nigeria, South Africa, Kenya, Ethiopia, Morocco and Egypt and even Togo and others made their humble marks. Ghana did not register anything, although our official representation was fully accomplished. That one, nobody beats us to it.
There are many Usain Bolts roaming the streets of Accra and other towns in a zombie-like manner with a bleak future staring at them. Their fate could be redesigned and redirected, only if we can spare some few cedis we spend to buy expensive vehicles for the comfort of few talking machines to develop sports facilities in the communities.
It should be possible for us to provide boxing gyms in certain parts of the country such as Greater Accra, Ashanti and the northern regions where we know the youth take delight in the sport.
For a country that can boast world-class boxers, it is an indictment that we cannot point at a single first-class boxing gym. A lot of the young men who trail us in the dark alleys and rob us could become useful citizens for themselves and this country, if their raw strength and talent could be channelled into some sporting disciplines.
We need more basketball and tennis courts in our various communities and I do not think we need to wait for oil money before constructing these facilities. The Williams sisters, Venus and Serena, went home with a cool US$4.5 million from the recent Wimbledon Open. Who says given the facilities we cannot produce our own tennis stars here?
We cannot continue to blame everything on lack of funds. What we need most and urgently is a sense of direction and the ability to put our priorities right. Sports development, even at the tertiary level, is nothing to write home about. Gone are the days when there were keen competitions at all levels of the educational ladder. There were the Academicals, Intercollegiate and the annual Triangular games, which all helped to unearth raw talents for national assignment.
It is sad that what we were doing in the 60s and 70s have become a mirage today. We need to step up our dedication to sports development in the country. It is an area that will not only bring honour to our country but can tremendously promote youth employment. The investments being made by a few of our successful professional footballers go to prove that sports development holds a major key to national development only if our leaders will devote more attention to it.
When China took the decision to host the 29th Olympiad, they did not only just invest over US$60 billion for others to come and cart away the medals. They prepared themselves adequately and made medal hauls in areas that were even considered the traditional preserves of the Americans and Europeans. We just hosted the 2008 edition of the Africa Cup of Nations and got excited with a third place.
The nationalistic pride that gripped this nation at independence has gradually given way to complacency and despondency. This time we do not care about national pride when we fail to make a good showing in international tournaments. The last time we won the Africa Cup was in 1982. We were the first African country to win Bronze in football at the Barcelona Games 10 years later. Since then Cameroon and Nigeria have won football Gold at the Olympics. This year, whereas we could not even qualify, Nigeria managed to get silver after losing narrowly to Argentina in the finals.
The nations that are making it are those that have identified strengths and have taken positive steps to harness these strengths for national development. We have sporting talents that need official support. We can be winners and not mere participants if we get our act together. In addition, the financial windfall that sports is bringing to individuals and nations may shower on us too.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
CHINA'S MESSAGE TO THE WORLD
THE 88 or so Heads of State who watched the opening ceremony of the 29th Olympiad at the Beijing Olympics Stadium might have sat dazed with mouths open at the vintage show sold to the world which may prove difficult to equal. That is a big task for London, when the youth of the world assemble there in 2012.
Among the distinguished Heads of State were some African leaders, including our own President J.A. Kufuor, and I was wondering what went through their minds as they watched in amazement, the spectacular choreograph of human movement, the beating of drums, clanging of cymbals, music from over 11,000 voices and the thumping of feet from a dense forest of human legs.
As for President George W. Bush and his allies from the West, their worst fears have come to pass — that the Beijing Olympic Games will open the eyes of the world for it to see what really a great one-time backward nation called China had become in just a matter of two decades.
The West tried in vain, even before it started, to dilute the successes of the Games after they failed to prevent the International Olympic Committee (IOC) from awarding Beijing the 2008 Games. First, it was the cynical prediction that the Chinese do not have the financial clout and the technical and technological expertise to put in place the facilities in a matter of seven years for the hosting of the Games.
When they realised at the last hour that the physical facilities were set, the West opened a new battle front — that China does not deserve to play host to the rest of the world because of its poor human rights record. The journey of the Olympic Torch from Mount Olympus in Greece to Beijing was disrupted at several places with well-rehearsed demonstrations against China’s rule over Tibet.
At one stage, Africa was brought into the fray, when, as if crying for a poor continent, the West decided to use China’s business links with The Sudan as an excuse for the unending Darfur conflict. There were threats from world leaders with leanings towards the West to boycott the opening ceremony.
In fact, everything, including the dark clouds that hung over Beijing was used to make the Games unpopular and if possible, a failure. However, the spirit of the Olympic Games — uniting the world under the canopy of sports — prevailed, and the world denied those who want to settle political scores on the sporting arena the luxury of victory.
So they all came. President George W. Bush was there with his wife and father, former President George Bush. So was Nicolas Sarkozy of France, who was among the first leaders who threatened boycotting the Games. When they came, they saw that no amount of propaganda can destroy the spirit of a people who are determined to carry their destiny into their own hands. China will be the centre of attraction for the world during the Games, and after that the world cannot ignore its dramatic entry into worldstage economically, industrially, technologically and scientifically.
Apart from the impressive opening ceremony which foreign correspondents acknowledged as first class, the quality of the facilities provided by the Chinese made nonsense of the initial doubts raised about their capability to organise and host the games.
That brings me back to the African leaders who witnessed the historical opening ceremony. Were they just mesmerised or they dreamt seeing their respective countries becoming another China in the next few years?
It will be unfair to put China into the same jacket as African countries, because the former’s civilisation dates back several thousands of years. However, before the Deng Xiaoping years, when China introduced economic reforms and changed its development direction by embarking on a massive capitalisation process, it had everything in common with most African countries, including Ghana. It had an economy that could not match those in the developed Western countries and also placed excessive emphasis on state ownership. Owing to its ideological posture, it could not open the economy to direct foreign capital from the West.
All that changed by 1992, when Deng pushed for a market-oriented economy, which was endorsed at the 14th Party Congress. That opened the doors widely for the Chinese economy to attract direct foreign investment from the West. Industrialisation shifted gear from the archaic state-owned enterprises to market-driven enterprises, either as state-private ownership or wholly privately-owned . That set China on a new development path which took the world by storm. There was, however, a precondition — that the raising of the living standards of the people should not be compromised when adopting capitalist measures to develop the economy.
China has since moved fast to become the fastest developing economy in the world. It has sustained an average growth rate of 9.5 per cent over the past 26 years, and has become a preferred destination for the relocation of global manufacturing facilities.
In Ghana, similar arguments were made against state-owned enterprises. Government has no business indulging in petty trading, building hotels or distributing commodities, so went the argument. Various governments, in response to this challenge, embarked on a privatisation process which got to its peak in the 1980s when the Ghana Industrial Holding Corporation (GIHOC) was totally dismembered and its affiliate companies divested, sold or privatised.
The interesting question is, how come that almost all the state enterprises which were divested or sold with the intention of injecting into them fresh capital and better managerial competence did not blossom into bigger and better companies?
You can mention them. The tomato factories at Pwalagu and Wenchi; the Leather Factory in Kumasi; the Bonsa Tyre Factory; the Meat Factory at Bolgatanga; the GIHOC Pharmaceuticals, the Cannery at Nsawam; the Tema Food Complex; the State Fishing Corporation; Tema Shipyard and Drydock, the State Shipping Line and many others. All these have ceased to exist and nothing better had sprouted in their stead.
The country’s industrial sector has crumbled from a humble beginning as a newly developing nation with a modest industrial base, processing goods to become a net importer of everything, including toothpick and fruit juices.
What did the Chinese and those other countries that have made it do, which we failed to do? In short, what went wrong with our privatisation process?
Can it be said that over the years, our leaders were careless or were not sincere about the way they disposed of these state enterprises? From an emerging industrial country, we have slipped back as producers of raw materials to feed factories in other countries. When we look back to those years when Ghana had a flourishing textile industry, with her popular GTP Real Wax Print being a leader on the international market, we ask ourselves, what happened?
Not only did the garment and leather industries that collapsed, surrender to foreign textiles and leather products. Virtually, everything on our local market came from outside, either as brand new or as discarded and disused junk, popularly called home-used.
If China and other Asian countries have been able to open up to foreign capital without necessarily compromising local production, how come we could not do so over here? Surely, China could not have jumped onto the international market in such a dramatic manner without a good blend of foreign capital and technical know-how on one hand and local ingenuity on the other.
The current situation, which allows excessive importation of food items such as onion, tomato, maize and rice when conditions are conducive for local production, means we are a long way from coming near to the achievements of China and other south-east Asian countries.
Liberalisation to the point where the country has virtually become a dumping ground for any conceivable commodity from outside cannot encourage local production, and in the long run, cannot free the country from its dependency syndrome.
As for our preparation towards and participation in the Games, the least said about it, the better. We took everything for granted.
China has sent a message which must not be taken for granted. That is, nothing ventured, nothing gained. The world is not going to wait for us. We must begin to rely more on ourselves rather than seeing salvation as coming from outside.
Among the distinguished Heads of State were some African leaders, including our own President J.A. Kufuor, and I was wondering what went through their minds as they watched in amazement, the spectacular choreograph of human movement, the beating of drums, clanging of cymbals, music from over 11,000 voices and the thumping of feet from a dense forest of human legs.
As for President George W. Bush and his allies from the West, their worst fears have come to pass — that the Beijing Olympic Games will open the eyes of the world for it to see what really a great one-time backward nation called China had become in just a matter of two decades.
The West tried in vain, even before it started, to dilute the successes of the Games after they failed to prevent the International Olympic Committee (IOC) from awarding Beijing the 2008 Games. First, it was the cynical prediction that the Chinese do not have the financial clout and the technical and technological expertise to put in place the facilities in a matter of seven years for the hosting of the Games.
When they realised at the last hour that the physical facilities were set, the West opened a new battle front — that China does not deserve to play host to the rest of the world because of its poor human rights record. The journey of the Olympic Torch from Mount Olympus in Greece to Beijing was disrupted at several places with well-rehearsed demonstrations against China’s rule over Tibet.
At one stage, Africa was brought into the fray, when, as if crying for a poor continent, the West decided to use China’s business links with The Sudan as an excuse for the unending Darfur conflict. There were threats from world leaders with leanings towards the West to boycott the opening ceremony.
In fact, everything, including the dark clouds that hung over Beijing was used to make the Games unpopular and if possible, a failure. However, the spirit of the Olympic Games — uniting the world under the canopy of sports — prevailed, and the world denied those who want to settle political scores on the sporting arena the luxury of victory.
So they all came. President George W. Bush was there with his wife and father, former President George Bush. So was Nicolas Sarkozy of France, who was among the first leaders who threatened boycotting the Games. When they came, they saw that no amount of propaganda can destroy the spirit of a people who are determined to carry their destiny into their own hands. China will be the centre of attraction for the world during the Games, and after that the world cannot ignore its dramatic entry into worldstage economically, industrially, technologically and scientifically.
Apart from the impressive opening ceremony which foreign correspondents acknowledged as first class, the quality of the facilities provided by the Chinese made nonsense of the initial doubts raised about their capability to organise and host the games.
That brings me back to the African leaders who witnessed the historical opening ceremony. Were they just mesmerised or they dreamt seeing their respective countries becoming another China in the next few years?
It will be unfair to put China into the same jacket as African countries, because the former’s civilisation dates back several thousands of years. However, before the Deng Xiaoping years, when China introduced economic reforms and changed its development direction by embarking on a massive capitalisation process, it had everything in common with most African countries, including Ghana. It had an economy that could not match those in the developed Western countries and also placed excessive emphasis on state ownership. Owing to its ideological posture, it could not open the economy to direct foreign capital from the West.
All that changed by 1992, when Deng pushed for a market-oriented economy, which was endorsed at the 14th Party Congress. That opened the doors widely for the Chinese economy to attract direct foreign investment from the West. Industrialisation shifted gear from the archaic state-owned enterprises to market-driven enterprises, either as state-private ownership or wholly privately-owned . That set China on a new development path which took the world by storm. There was, however, a precondition — that the raising of the living standards of the people should not be compromised when adopting capitalist measures to develop the economy.
China has since moved fast to become the fastest developing economy in the world. It has sustained an average growth rate of 9.5 per cent over the past 26 years, and has become a preferred destination for the relocation of global manufacturing facilities.
In Ghana, similar arguments were made against state-owned enterprises. Government has no business indulging in petty trading, building hotels or distributing commodities, so went the argument. Various governments, in response to this challenge, embarked on a privatisation process which got to its peak in the 1980s when the Ghana Industrial Holding Corporation (GIHOC) was totally dismembered and its affiliate companies divested, sold or privatised.
The interesting question is, how come that almost all the state enterprises which were divested or sold with the intention of injecting into them fresh capital and better managerial competence did not blossom into bigger and better companies?
You can mention them. The tomato factories at Pwalagu and Wenchi; the Leather Factory in Kumasi; the Bonsa Tyre Factory; the Meat Factory at Bolgatanga; the GIHOC Pharmaceuticals, the Cannery at Nsawam; the Tema Food Complex; the State Fishing Corporation; Tema Shipyard and Drydock, the State Shipping Line and many others. All these have ceased to exist and nothing better had sprouted in their stead.
The country’s industrial sector has crumbled from a humble beginning as a newly developing nation with a modest industrial base, processing goods to become a net importer of everything, including toothpick and fruit juices.
What did the Chinese and those other countries that have made it do, which we failed to do? In short, what went wrong with our privatisation process?
Can it be said that over the years, our leaders were careless or were not sincere about the way they disposed of these state enterprises? From an emerging industrial country, we have slipped back as producers of raw materials to feed factories in other countries. When we look back to those years when Ghana had a flourishing textile industry, with her popular GTP Real Wax Print being a leader on the international market, we ask ourselves, what happened?
Not only did the garment and leather industries that collapsed, surrender to foreign textiles and leather products. Virtually, everything on our local market came from outside, either as brand new or as discarded and disused junk, popularly called home-used.
If China and other Asian countries have been able to open up to foreign capital without necessarily compromising local production, how come we could not do so over here? Surely, China could not have jumped onto the international market in such a dramatic manner without a good blend of foreign capital and technical know-how on one hand and local ingenuity on the other.
The current situation, which allows excessive importation of food items such as onion, tomato, maize and rice when conditions are conducive for local production, means we are a long way from coming near to the achievements of China and other south-east Asian countries.
Liberalisation to the point where the country has virtually become a dumping ground for any conceivable commodity from outside cannot encourage local production, and in the long run, cannot free the country from its dependency syndrome.
As for our preparation towards and participation in the Games, the least said about it, the better. We took everything for granted.
China has sent a message which must not be taken for granted. That is, nothing ventured, nothing gained. The world is not going to wait for us. We must begin to rely more on ourselves rather than seeing salvation as coming from outside.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
TAKING PEACE FOR GRANTED (PAGE 7)
Rwanda was affectionately referred to as: “A tropical Switzerland in the heart of Africa”, apparently because of its natural scenic beauty formed by dense forests and a rugged mountainous terrain.
Rwanda is a small country inhabited mostly by the Hutu and the Tutsi ethnic groups who co-existed peacefully for centuries, sharing language, culture and conjugal bonds until the arrival of European colonialists. The Belgians who ruled the country tactically favoured the Tutsis and imposed them on the Hutus who became more or less of vassals.
The peace was gone and in its stead was acrimony that occasionally exploded into violent clashes. Even then, Rwanda continued to maintain an uneasy calm until the events of April 6, 1994. On that day, the aircraft carrying President Juvenal Habyarimana, a Hutu, was brought down under circumstances that could still not be explained, many years after that incident. Contrary to the claim by the Hutus that the Tutsis were behind the crash, the Tutsis blamed it on Hutu extremists who masterminded the crash to pave way for their long-held agenda of settling scores with the Tutsis.
Immediately, by radio and other means, news went round that the Tutsis had killed the President, who is a Hutu. The Hutus were incited to rise up, for the final hour had come when they had to deal a final solution to the Tutsi menace that had haunted the Hutus for years.
Within moments, Rwanda, one of the most beautiful places on Earth, became a killing field. Everything, from machetes to axes, were freely used in hacking human beings like firewood. When something close to sanity finally returned after 90 days of madness, over one million Tutsis and moderate Hutus had been killed.
Rwanda had had its ethnic problems for years but it took that radio announcement deliberately made for effect, to trigger that animalistic instinct in men and to subsequently unleash that avalanche of bloodbath in that country.
Events following the April 6, 1994 plane crash of President Habyarimana, might have sobered Rwandans and brought them to the realisation that violence in all its forms cannot solve but compound their problems. Rwanda is gradually picking the pieces, but a million lives lost in a matter of three months cannot be forgotten so easily and some families and individuals including innocent children who lost their parents may never recover from the carnage.
Thanks to the lenses of the cameras of international television channels, we in Ghana cannot pretend not to have seen bloated bodies of the Rwandan genocide that were dumped in mass graves. We could not have missed the exodus of women and children with what little belongings they could carry, fleeing the mayhem to neighbouring countries.
The problem of Liberia is well known to us here, because we were and still are part of it. The invasion of Liberia by rebels led by Charles Taylor from Cote d’Ivoire in 1989, triggered a series of events that culminated in one of the bloodiest civil wars in Africa.
By the time that war ended in 1996, over 200,000 Liberians were dead and over a million others displaced as refugees in neighbouring countries including our own Ghana, where a new township — Budumburam — sprang up to accommodate the refugees.
Our own soldiers, for years, were deployed as part of the ECOWAS Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) to keep the peace in Liberia, and that did not go without enormous human, financial and material sacrifices. Some of the Liberians are still with us, and there is no evidence that they will end their stay in the immediate future. Maybe they have acclimatised and want to be part of us. But the truth is, it is war that brought them here and not a voluntary decision.
Cote d’Ivoire was like an oasis in a desert until they tasted their first coup on December 24, 1999. That was when the government of Konan Bedie was overthrown by General Robert Guei.
The peace and political stability that Cote d’Ivoire enjoyed during the reign of Houphouet Boigny in a region notorious for military coups got shattered and the island in the vast ocean became another case of political and ethnic confrontation in the sub-region.
In 2000, an attempt by General Guei to declare himself elected president after a general election was met with fierce resistance from Mr Laurent Gbagbo’s supporters, who stormed the presidential palace. In the ensuing violent confrontation, hundreds of Ivoriens lost their lives. The seeds of bitter rivalry had been sown and the oasis was gone.
Before the 2000 general election, the Ivoriens ratified a controversial constitution that excluded those not considered to be full-blooded Ivoriens from running as president. This clause seriously affected many prominent politicians from the north especially opposition leader Allassane Ouattara.
The tension created by this constitutional barrier was further exacerbated on September 19, 2002 when General Guei attempted a coup to stage a comeback. The confrontation that followed split the country into two with the predominantly Muslim north being held by the Patriotic Movement of Cote d’Ivoire (MPCI), while the south remained in government hands.
Even though the fight has ceased, Cote d’Ivoire has not been the same again and its unitary state is still in the balance. That is what political intolerance and fanning of ethnic sentiments can do to an otherwise peaceful country.
In 2007, Nigerians escaped political turmoil after what was seen by many as a flawed election because they have history to guide them.
I have heard people often say that Ghana is blessed and, therefore, cannot experience what other countries have gone through. It is good to sound so optimistic, but the truth is that Ghana is not different from other countries. It is true that Ghana has taken over as the oasis in a troubled region, at least so far as political stability is concerned. So do we have to take it for granted?
Events in Kenya, after December 27, 2007, are clear indications that every country can go into flames if the conditions allow it. The only thing that can make Ghana different is for its people to remove or avoid those things that trigger violent confrontations in other countries. These include political intolerance, lawlessness, lack of transparency, political vindictiveness, insults, ethnocentrism and tribalism.
The partial registration exercise that started on July 31, 2008, has recorded a few nasty incidents at some registration centres. There were even reports of shooting incidents at some places.
Apart from that, the two major political parties — the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) — have traded accusations and counter-accusations, each blaming the other for the violence and other malpractices that have reared their ugly heads so far in the registration exercise.
Going to the polls to elect a President and legislators should not be likened to going to the battlefield. That is why there is no need to beat the war drums. Political parties and candidates should be able to market their ideas in a civil and peaceful manner without inciting emotions.
As stated earlier, no society is immune to violence so long as certain obstacles to peace are not removed. That is why the Electoral Commission (EC) must be encouraged and supported to conduct its legitimate business in a peaceful and congenial atmosphere and it must be seen to be in full control of affairs. The leadership of the various political parties, especially NPP and NDC, have a crucial role to play in this regard.
The ground rules have been spelt out in clear and unambiguous terms. It is nobody’s business to prevent anyone from registering. Where there are doubts, the appropriate forms must be filled to allow the EC to do its mandated work in the interest of all. The security agencies, especially the police are there to intervene where there are clear cases of breach of the law. It will be wrong for political parties to take over the work of the EC and the police.
Inflammatory statements must be avoided. The media, especially the radio stations, must desist from using their mediums as platforms for charlatans, demagogues and rabble-rousers to inflame passion that could incite the people to violence.
I do not see why people should be desperate for political power if their aim is to make this country a better place. Coming events, they say, cast their own shadows. If we want a peaceful and fair election, then the lessons from the registration exercise should put us on the alert.
The message of tolerance, fairness and transparency featured prominently in all the deliveries at last week’s two-day Daily Graphic Governance Dialogue held in Accra and it is the responsibility of all, especially those who want to rule this country, to ensure that the message permeates their rank and file.
There is a thin line separating peace from violence. Just as it took a plane crash to bring about a genocide in Rwanda, it can take an argument at a registration centre or polling station to trigger more serious events. As for the claim that we are different, it is an illusion and the earlier we worked hard to preserve our peace, the better.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
Rwanda is a small country inhabited mostly by the Hutu and the Tutsi ethnic groups who co-existed peacefully for centuries, sharing language, culture and conjugal bonds until the arrival of European colonialists. The Belgians who ruled the country tactically favoured the Tutsis and imposed them on the Hutus who became more or less of vassals.
The peace was gone and in its stead was acrimony that occasionally exploded into violent clashes. Even then, Rwanda continued to maintain an uneasy calm until the events of April 6, 1994. On that day, the aircraft carrying President Juvenal Habyarimana, a Hutu, was brought down under circumstances that could still not be explained, many years after that incident. Contrary to the claim by the Hutus that the Tutsis were behind the crash, the Tutsis blamed it on Hutu extremists who masterminded the crash to pave way for their long-held agenda of settling scores with the Tutsis.
Immediately, by radio and other means, news went round that the Tutsis had killed the President, who is a Hutu. The Hutus were incited to rise up, for the final hour had come when they had to deal a final solution to the Tutsi menace that had haunted the Hutus for years.
Within moments, Rwanda, one of the most beautiful places on Earth, became a killing field. Everything, from machetes to axes, were freely used in hacking human beings like firewood. When something close to sanity finally returned after 90 days of madness, over one million Tutsis and moderate Hutus had been killed.
Rwanda had had its ethnic problems for years but it took that radio announcement deliberately made for effect, to trigger that animalistic instinct in men and to subsequently unleash that avalanche of bloodbath in that country.
Events following the April 6, 1994 plane crash of President Habyarimana, might have sobered Rwandans and brought them to the realisation that violence in all its forms cannot solve but compound their problems. Rwanda is gradually picking the pieces, but a million lives lost in a matter of three months cannot be forgotten so easily and some families and individuals including innocent children who lost their parents may never recover from the carnage.
Thanks to the lenses of the cameras of international television channels, we in Ghana cannot pretend not to have seen bloated bodies of the Rwandan genocide that were dumped in mass graves. We could not have missed the exodus of women and children with what little belongings they could carry, fleeing the mayhem to neighbouring countries.
The problem of Liberia is well known to us here, because we were and still are part of it. The invasion of Liberia by rebels led by Charles Taylor from Cote d’Ivoire in 1989, triggered a series of events that culminated in one of the bloodiest civil wars in Africa.
By the time that war ended in 1996, over 200,000 Liberians were dead and over a million others displaced as refugees in neighbouring countries including our own Ghana, where a new township — Budumburam — sprang up to accommodate the refugees.
Our own soldiers, for years, were deployed as part of the ECOWAS Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) to keep the peace in Liberia, and that did not go without enormous human, financial and material sacrifices. Some of the Liberians are still with us, and there is no evidence that they will end their stay in the immediate future. Maybe they have acclimatised and want to be part of us. But the truth is, it is war that brought them here and not a voluntary decision.
Cote d’Ivoire was like an oasis in a desert until they tasted their first coup on December 24, 1999. That was when the government of Konan Bedie was overthrown by General Robert Guei.
The peace and political stability that Cote d’Ivoire enjoyed during the reign of Houphouet Boigny in a region notorious for military coups got shattered and the island in the vast ocean became another case of political and ethnic confrontation in the sub-region.
In 2000, an attempt by General Guei to declare himself elected president after a general election was met with fierce resistance from Mr Laurent Gbagbo’s supporters, who stormed the presidential palace. In the ensuing violent confrontation, hundreds of Ivoriens lost their lives. The seeds of bitter rivalry had been sown and the oasis was gone.
Before the 2000 general election, the Ivoriens ratified a controversial constitution that excluded those not considered to be full-blooded Ivoriens from running as president. This clause seriously affected many prominent politicians from the north especially opposition leader Allassane Ouattara.
The tension created by this constitutional barrier was further exacerbated on September 19, 2002 when General Guei attempted a coup to stage a comeback. The confrontation that followed split the country into two with the predominantly Muslim north being held by the Patriotic Movement of Cote d’Ivoire (MPCI), while the south remained in government hands.
Even though the fight has ceased, Cote d’Ivoire has not been the same again and its unitary state is still in the balance. That is what political intolerance and fanning of ethnic sentiments can do to an otherwise peaceful country.
In 2007, Nigerians escaped political turmoil after what was seen by many as a flawed election because they have history to guide them.
I have heard people often say that Ghana is blessed and, therefore, cannot experience what other countries have gone through. It is good to sound so optimistic, but the truth is that Ghana is not different from other countries. It is true that Ghana has taken over as the oasis in a troubled region, at least so far as political stability is concerned. So do we have to take it for granted?
Events in Kenya, after December 27, 2007, are clear indications that every country can go into flames if the conditions allow it. The only thing that can make Ghana different is for its people to remove or avoid those things that trigger violent confrontations in other countries. These include political intolerance, lawlessness, lack of transparency, political vindictiveness, insults, ethnocentrism and tribalism.
The partial registration exercise that started on July 31, 2008, has recorded a few nasty incidents at some registration centres. There were even reports of shooting incidents at some places.
Apart from that, the two major political parties — the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) — have traded accusations and counter-accusations, each blaming the other for the violence and other malpractices that have reared their ugly heads so far in the registration exercise.
Going to the polls to elect a President and legislators should not be likened to going to the battlefield. That is why there is no need to beat the war drums. Political parties and candidates should be able to market their ideas in a civil and peaceful manner without inciting emotions.
As stated earlier, no society is immune to violence so long as certain obstacles to peace are not removed. That is why the Electoral Commission (EC) must be encouraged and supported to conduct its legitimate business in a peaceful and congenial atmosphere and it must be seen to be in full control of affairs. The leadership of the various political parties, especially NPP and NDC, have a crucial role to play in this regard.
The ground rules have been spelt out in clear and unambiguous terms. It is nobody’s business to prevent anyone from registering. Where there are doubts, the appropriate forms must be filled to allow the EC to do its mandated work in the interest of all. The security agencies, especially the police are there to intervene where there are clear cases of breach of the law. It will be wrong for political parties to take over the work of the EC and the police.
Inflammatory statements must be avoided. The media, especially the radio stations, must desist from using their mediums as platforms for charlatans, demagogues and rabble-rousers to inflame passion that could incite the people to violence.
I do not see why people should be desperate for political power if their aim is to make this country a better place. Coming events, they say, cast their own shadows. If we want a peaceful and fair election, then the lessons from the registration exercise should put us on the alert.
The message of tolerance, fairness and transparency featured prominently in all the deliveries at last week’s two-day Daily Graphic Governance Dialogue held in Accra and it is the responsibility of all, especially those who want to rule this country, to ensure that the message permeates their rank and file.
There is a thin line separating peace from violence. Just as it took a plane crash to bring about a genocide in Rwanda, it can take an argument at a registration centre or polling station to trigger more serious events. As for the claim that we are different, it is an illusion and the earlier we worked hard to preserve our peace, the better.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
THANK YOU, MR PRESIDENT
BY all indications the job of the President is daunting and exacting. For a Third World country like Ghana, with its myriad of multi-faceted problems, anyone who offers himself as leader must expect nothing but sleepless nights, not even if he swallows hundreds of grammes of valium or any of its derivatives.
Even before the President sets out from his residence the morning for the Castle, he has to contend with visits from close relatives, intimate friends and party loyalists whose business cannot be mixed with the official one at the Castle.
Not that there cannot be thrills and excitement. While being driven at high speed in a custom-made limousine on the best roads in the city to the office, the President may, for a moment, forget that the streets are not as empty as the speed and fluidity with which his motorcade cutting through space may portray. That is when the power and the glory of the Presidency come into full bloom, and that is how some people who watch the gleaming vehicles speeding by nurture big dreams of going to the Castle.
Our President, in that cosy environment, may not know that thousands of motorists are trapped in suffocating traffic in the city, starting from the outskirts at the Tetteh-Quarshie Interchange.
With the ride over, the President is confronted with the real business of the day when he finally arrives at the Castle. I can just picture it. The day’s office work may start with the study of the Situation Report (Sitrep) filed from the national security apparatus. It is absolutely necessary that the President begins this way, at least to assure himself that the state of the nation called Ghana is healthy and secure.
He may then go through the mails, or at least be seen to have done so, and go through the motion of assigning responsibilities. He may then receive briefings by his close lieutenants and confidantes, such as the Chief of Staff and Minister for Presidential Affairs, the Chief Advisor and the Head of National Security.
The President then turns to some schedules, which may include meetings with the diplomatic community, by way of receiving letters of credence from new envoys, receiving farewell messages from those departing after their duty tour in Ghana and holding discussions with international business delegations.
Our President should be tired and hungry by now, but before retiring for lunch break and preparing for the Cabinet meeting scheduled for the late evening, there are these multitudes of different delegations he must attend to or risk being described as uncaring. These are the delegations that I am interested in and who, under a normal scheme of things, do not have any business disturbing the President.
The first of such delegations has travelled from one of the numerous traditional areas we have in the country to announce the death of a chief and to officially invite the President to the funeral. Death is a painful thing and the death of a prominent chief is news. But should the announcement of death eat into the President’s time when his schedule is already tight and heavy?
Our President is already racking his brain trying to get solutions to poverty which is eating away his people; he is grappling with the problem of streetism which he could not miss, even through the heavily tinted windows of his limousine while being driven to the office. He is aware that notwithstanding his efforts, a lot of our children are still not in school and some of those who go virtually return home empty headed for several reasons, including lack of teachers, teaching materials and congenial classrooms.
The President knows, even if he has not been told by his ministers, that most of the traffic lights in the capital city do not function, just as many homes are in darkness because of power outages.
Even if everything seems to be well with the President, as a human being he cannot fail to worry over some of the insults he has to cope with every day from serial callers who make a living using unprintable words against perceived political opponents and the President in particular. So, he would need a little bit of time for sober reflection.
After the departure of this delegation, there is another with a similar mission, albeit with a slight difference. This delegation from a traditional area has come to thank the President for attending the funeral of their late chief.
If it is not about the funeral of a chief, then it must be about the enstoolment and installation of another. And the President must be told in person at the Castle.
Should this also consume the President’s precious time? These are the same chiefs who are always crying for one amenity or another. How can the President respond to these cries if he has to spend time just to receive a thank-you message? What are the roles of his representatives in the districts and regions if certain simple information cannot be channelled through them for the attention of the President? Why do we have a Minister for Chieftaincy Affairs if he cannot receive funeral announcements on behalf of the government?
The ordeal with delegations is not over. There is another group of chiefs who has come to the Castle to thank the President for creating a new district for the people, even before the proposal receives legal or constitutional backing. Is it charitable work for the President to create a district if there is good reason for it? And do we have to thank him for performing his statutory assignment as the Chief Executive Officer of the land?
Following these chiefs is another batch that has come to complain about the siting of the capital of a new district created for their area and, therefore, want a change.
You see where the President’s good intentions has landed him and his government?
There is still another group of chiefs supported by their youth who have come to lodge a protest with the President for not remembering them in the creation of new districts.
Chiefs are not the only people who take delight in sending delegations to the Castle. About a month ago a group of principals of some teacher training colleges went to the Castle to thank the President for giving their schools vehicles. Outrageous!
Even if they are so excited, as if the President dipped into his own pocket to buy those vehicles for them, couldn’t they have sent a “thank you” card to the President through the Director-General of the Ghana Education Service?
Our women, who claim what men can do they can do it better, proved how grateful they could also be in a rather dramatic manner when some pregnant women marched to the Castle about three weeks ago to thank the President for allowing them free access to medical services. Some were even heard boasting, out of excitement, that they could now encourage their husbands to impregnate them the more. “Condom-free all the way” was their battle cry.
Our culture recognises favours, goodwill and good work. That is why there is a common saying that a person who does good deserves praise or commendation. But should that mean that every day the President should receive delegations carrying ‘thank you’ messages along with them?
Why are politicians criss-crossing the length and breadth of the country with lots of promises under their armpits around this time of the year if not because they want our authority to govern us? Why should we be the ones to wake up every morning going to the Castle to thank the President for doing just a bit of the numerous things he promised to do for us with our own national resources which are under his full control?
Why should we be the ones going to the President and his ministers to thank them for the work they offered themselves freely to do and for which reason we have spent a huge chunk of our national resources to make their lives more comfortable than ours?
By all means we need to express appreciation where it is due, especially in exceptional situations, to boost morale and serve as an encouragement for bigger achievements and successes. However, when it is done in a sycophantic manner, the returns become negative for the progress of the nation.
There is good reason to believe that this attitude has a lot to do with the mindset of our leaders who, along the line, begin to see themselves more as gods and masters than the servants that they pledged to be.
Surely, the ministries, departments, agencies and assemblies were not created for nothing. A lot of load could be taken off the shoulders of the President if most of these delegations, whatever their mission, will end their trips at the doorstep of any of these institutions.
For the President to go to the office and spend the whole day receiving funeral and “thank you” means we do not have serious problems facing us as a nation. The Castle should remain the seat of government where serious business is conducted and the President must have the peace to do so.
It is also time we absorbed the bare truth that governments everywhere are not charitable institutions that dish out favours to their citizens, not even dictatorships.
Therefore, the President and his ministers are not doing us any favour if they do what is constitutionally required of them, more so when they freely offered themselves to serve the nation. That is why, as a reciprocal gesture, we sacrifice a lot to make their lives very comfortable, even if that means some other citizens forfeiting their basic and legitimate needs.
Therefore, it is the people of Ghana who deserve a very big “thank you” from the President for having given him their mandate, among the millions, to be their supreme leader.
Kofiakordor.blogspot.com
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
Even before the President sets out from his residence the morning for the Castle, he has to contend with visits from close relatives, intimate friends and party loyalists whose business cannot be mixed with the official one at the Castle.
Not that there cannot be thrills and excitement. While being driven at high speed in a custom-made limousine on the best roads in the city to the office, the President may, for a moment, forget that the streets are not as empty as the speed and fluidity with which his motorcade cutting through space may portray. That is when the power and the glory of the Presidency come into full bloom, and that is how some people who watch the gleaming vehicles speeding by nurture big dreams of going to the Castle.
Our President, in that cosy environment, may not know that thousands of motorists are trapped in suffocating traffic in the city, starting from the outskirts at the Tetteh-Quarshie Interchange.
With the ride over, the President is confronted with the real business of the day when he finally arrives at the Castle. I can just picture it. The day’s office work may start with the study of the Situation Report (Sitrep) filed from the national security apparatus. It is absolutely necessary that the President begins this way, at least to assure himself that the state of the nation called Ghana is healthy and secure.
He may then go through the mails, or at least be seen to have done so, and go through the motion of assigning responsibilities. He may then receive briefings by his close lieutenants and confidantes, such as the Chief of Staff and Minister for Presidential Affairs, the Chief Advisor and the Head of National Security.
The President then turns to some schedules, which may include meetings with the diplomatic community, by way of receiving letters of credence from new envoys, receiving farewell messages from those departing after their duty tour in Ghana and holding discussions with international business delegations.
Our President should be tired and hungry by now, but before retiring for lunch break and preparing for the Cabinet meeting scheduled for the late evening, there are these multitudes of different delegations he must attend to or risk being described as uncaring. These are the delegations that I am interested in and who, under a normal scheme of things, do not have any business disturbing the President.
The first of such delegations has travelled from one of the numerous traditional areas we have in the country to announce the death of a chief and to officially invite the President to the funeral. Death is a painful thing and the death of a prominent chief is news. But should the announcement of death eat into the President’s time when his schedule is already tight and heavy?
Our President is already racking his brain trying to get solutions to poverty which is eating away his people; he is grappling with the problem of streetism which he could not miss, even through the heavily tinted windows of his limousine while being driven to the office. He is aware that notwithstanding his efforts, a lot of our children are still not in school and some of those who go virtually return home empty headed for several reasons, including lack of teachers, teaching materials and congenial classrooms.
The President knows, even if he has not been told by his ministers, that most of the traffic lights in the capital city do not function, just as many homes are in darkness because of power outages.
Even if everything seems to be well with the President, as a human being he cannot fail to worry over some of the insults he has to cope with every day from serial callers who make a living using unprintable words against perceived political opponents and the President in particular. So, he would need a little bit of time for sober reflection.
After the departure of this delegation, there is another with a similar mission, albeit with a slight difference. This delegation from a traditional area has come to thank the President for attending the funeral of their late chief.
If it is not about the funeral of a chief, then it must be about the enstoolment and installation of another. And the President must be told in person at the Castle.
Should this also consume the President’s precious time? These are the same chiefs who are always crying for one amenity or another. How can the President respond to these cries if he has to spend time just to receive a thank-you message? What are the roles of his representatives in the districts and regions if certain simple information cannot be channelled through them for the attention of the President? Why do we have a Minister for Chieftaincy Affairs if he cannot receive funeral announcements on behalf of the government?
The ordeal with delegations is not over. There is another group of chiefs who has come to the Castle to thank the President for creating a new district for the people, even before the proposal receives legal or constitutional backing. Is it charitable work for the President to create a district if there is good reason for it? And do we have to thank him for performing his statutory assignment as the Chief Executive Officer of the land?
Following these chiefs is another batch that has come to complain about the siting of the capital of a new district created for their area and, therefore, want a change.
You see where the President’s good intentions has landed him and his government?
There is still another group of chiefs supported by their youth who have come to lodge a protest with the President for not remembering them in the creation of new districts.
Chiefs are not the only people who take delight in sending delegations to the Castle. About a month ago a group of principals of some teacher training colleges went to the Castle to thank the President for giving their schools vehicles. Outrageous!
Even if they are so excited, as if the President dipped into his own pocket to buy those vehicles for them, couldn’t they have sent a “thank you” card to the President through the Director-General of the Ghana Education Service?
Our women, who claim what men can do they can do it better, proved how grateful they could also be in a rather dramatic manner when some pregnant women marched to the Castle about three weeks ago to thank the President for allowing them free access to medical services. Some were even heard boasting, out of excitement, that they could now encourage their husbands to impregnate them the more. “Condom-free all the way” was their battle cry.
Our culture recognises favours, goodwill and good work. That is why there is a common saying that a person who does good deserves praise or commendation. But should that mean that every day the President should receive delegations carrying ‘thank you’ messages along with them?
Why are politicians criss-crossing the length and breadth of the country with lots of promises under their armpits around this time of the year if not because they want our authority to govern us? Why should we be the ones to wake up every morning going to the Castle to thank the President for doing just a bit of the numerous things he promised to do for us with our own national resources which are under his full control?
Why should we be the ones going to the President and his ministers to thank them for the work they offered themselves freely to do and for which reason we have spent a huge chunk of our national resources to make their lives more comfortable than ours?
By all means we need to express appreciation where it is due, especially in exceptional situations, to boost morale and serve as an encouragement for bigger achievements and successes. However, when it is done in a sycophantic manner, the returns become negative for the progress of the nation.
There is good reason to believe that this attitude has a lot to do with the mindset of our leaders who, along the line, begin to see themselves more as gods and masters than the servants that they pledged to be.
Surely, the ministries, departments, agencies and assemblies were not created for nothing. A lot of load could be taken off the shoulders of the President if most of these delegations, whatever their mission, will end their trips at the doorstep of any of these institutions.
For the President to go to the office and spend the whole day receiving funeral and “thank you” means we do not have serious problems facing us as a nation. The Castle should remain the seat of government where serious business is conducted and the President must have the peace to do so.
It is also time we absorbed the bare truth that governments everywhere are not charitable institutions that dish out favours to their citizens, not even dictatorships.
Therefore, the President and his ministers are not doing us any favour if they do what is constitutionally required of them, more so when they freely offered themselves to serve the nation. That is why, as a reciprocal gesture, we sacrifice a lot to make their lives very comfortable, even if that means some other citizens forfeiting their basic and legitimate needs.
Therefore, it is the people of Ghana who deserve a very big “thank you” from the President for having given him their mandate, among the millions, to be their supreme leader.
Kofiakordor.blogspot.com
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)