Welcome, to the Volta Barracks, Ghana
The Home of the Ancient Order of Field Artillerists
We are proud members of the Historical Brotherhood of
Stone hurlers, Archers, Catapulters, Rocketeers
Now referred to as GUNNERS.
With these impressive, valiant and proud words, the visitor is welcomed to the Volta Barracks, Ho, in the Volta Region. This is the home of the 66 Artillery Regiment of the Ghana Army. The unit came into existence on February 16, 1966 to enhance the fire power of the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) and was called the Medium Mortar Regiment (MMR), under the command of Captain Ekow Jones.
On June 3, 2003, the unit was upgraded with more artillery weapons, including the 107mm RL, the 122mm Howitzer and the 122mm MRLS and its name changed to the 66 Artillery Regiment. Like any other unit of the GAF, the 66 Artillery Regiment has, as its mission, to protect and defend the territorial sovereignty and integrity of the Motherland.
The unit no doubt, is one of the elite units in the GAF and had and continues to have some of the finest officers and brave men in uniform this country ever produced who have a distinguished record of achievements at both national and international levels.
Officers and men of the 66 Artillery Regiment have left an impressive mark on their peacekeeping operations throughout the world. It will be an arduous task trying to mention names, since there will be that natural tendency of leaving out some important ones.
However, as an illustration, one can, without any fear of diluting the menu, mention Lt General Seth Kofi Obeng, the immediate past Chief of the Defence Staff of the GAF, who, as a Gunner, was one time the Commanding Officer of the then MMR.
The presence of detachments of the unit is always conspicuous at ceremonial parades at the Independence Square in Accra and their home base in Ho, with their heavy guns and, lately, the multiple missile launchers.
Whoever chose the location of the Volta Barracks in Ho has a good taste for scenic beauty. Straddling between Ho-Dome and Takla, which shares boundaries with Hodzo and Kpenoe, the barracks is perched on a hill overlooking the town below.
The first-time visitor cannot but admire the neatly-mowed green lawns which welcome him to the home of the Gunners as he/she enters the wide gates of the entrance to the barracks. Many can only imagine seeing cannons and metal devices designed to kill in a military establishment such as the Volta Barracks. Far from that! Unless you are told, on a normal day you may mistake the barracks for a sanatorium where the sick come to convalesce for its greenery, freshness, neatness and quietness.
The officers and men of the 66 Artillery Regiment have historically maintained a kind of umbilical relationship with the inhabitants of Ho in particular and the Volta Region in general. As the only military establishment in the region with such a huge reputation, the people of the Volta Region have accepted the soldiers as part of them and the soldiers who set foot there hardly think of any other place as home. Ask Lt Col Ekow Jones, the first Commanding Officer of the unit, who virtually became a citizen of Ho.
This natural bond has been strengthened by social activities such as clean-up campaigns and blood donations embarked upon periodically by the soldiers. The Supreme Cannons, which is the resident band of the unit, is always available to satisfy the entertainment needs of the community.
That is not to say there have been no misunderstandings. There were times when revolutionary zeal took the better part of the soldiers who became too harsh on law breakers, especially during the so-called revolutionary era.
Troops from the unit were quick to respond to emergency situations such as the escalation of violence in volatile land disputes between the people of Tsito/Peki and Alavanyo/Nkonya.
The 66 Artillery Regiment is a unit any military establishment will be proud of and the Volta Barracks, the home of the Gunners, should be an attraction to all. Unfortunately, the journey to the barracks can be nightmarish.
I do not know whether it is deliberate to remind the soldiers and members of the public that military work is not a smooth one and, therefore, driving on a well-paved road to the barracks is itself a luxury that should not be encouraged.
I would have settled for this argument if all roads leading to the country’s other military establishments share common features with that of the Volta Barracks. It is a short distance that cannot be more than two kilometres, starting from the Ho-Dome Roundabout.
The road to the Volta Barracks, which houses one of the country’s most powerful military units, cannot be better than a farm road used mostly by tractors which do not deserve a well-tarred road. Nobody driving on that road will have an inkling of the fact that he/she is heading towards a military installation which holds strategic importance to the security of the state. It could be just another miserable road leading to nowhere.
The deep potholes give the impression of a road that has come under a barrage of mortar fire. Heaps of sand and chippings that gave hope that the road was going to be constructed have themselves become obstacles that must be surmounted before grabbing a fair share of the mumbo-jumbo road. This cannot be a question of a lack of funds.
A well-constructed two-kilometre road from the Ho-Dome Roundabout to the Volta Barracks should not be too much for the sovereign state of Ghana which derives pride from it military. For now, the GUNNERS have been neglected and treated with scorn, thereby diminishing their national importance.
The poor nature of the Volta Barracks road is just the story of Ho, the regional capital. I have heard the Regional Minister, Mr Kofi Dzamesi, praising Ho town roads at every opportunity. Well, someone may say something is better than nothing. But for a regional capital, Ho lacks roads. A short stretch of road from the Ho-Dome Roundabout to the Ahoe-Heve Roundabout, which is less than a kilometre, has taken more than three years to construct, without any sign of completion.
Other regional capitals have asphalted dual carriageways. If Ho cannot get asphalt, why not the good old bitumen on its roads? A good road can never be hidden. It will be there for everyone to see and every motorist to drive on. Ho has the potential of becoming a beautiful town that can attract investors and ordinary visitors if only those who have the power will show a little more interest in its development.
There are a lot of roads earmarked for construction, which, when done, can raise the status of the town and encourage more people to invest in it in particular and the municipality in general. A beautiful hotel called Executive Gardens, which had the potential to promote tourism and commercial activity in Ho, has virtually collapsed because those who matter do not see the need to improve the Ho-Adaklu Road and thus open up the hotel to visitors.
Ho has a naturally endowed beautiful landscape and a hospitable people who sometimes accept their fate rather too quietly. Sometimes, out of desperation, the people of the town wonder aloud whether they are part of this progressive nation called Ghana.
The Volta Barracks is actually part of Ho, the Volta Regional capital, and its fate cannot be detached from that of the town. It is, therefore, not out of order to say that the Volta Barracks is suffering from a disease called NEGLECT that has afflicted its mother.
To the officers and men of the 66 Artillery Regiment, good road or no good road, I know they will continue to live by their proud motto: “Once a GUNNER, Always a GUNNER”, and their battle cry: “Where there is ARTILLERY, there is GLORY”.
Kofiakordor.blogspot.com
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Monday, May 19, 2008
Too soon , too late
May 20, 2008
By Kofi Akordor
There was the story of a man who threatened divorce. The woman went down on her knees and family members and friends intervened. Eventually the disenchanted man gave in and husband and wife shared a common marital bed again. A few days into a reunited alliance, the wife, without warning, deserted camp and left a bewildered husband not only lonely but heavily humiliated. The man regretted ever changing his mind. He was now the person at the receiving end.
Ghana has found itself in a similar unpleasant situation today. In February this year, we had a good opportunity to dispense with the services of Claude Le Roy, the Frenchman who was coach of the Black Stars, for non-performance. The coach was to win gold at the Africa Cup of Nations tournament hosted by Ghana and qualify the Black Stars for the 2010 World Cup to be hosted by South Africa. “Host and Win” was the battle cry and that spelt out in clear terms the working agenda for the coach.
We ended up with bronze, which does not matter, seriously speaking, in such competitions. Gold and bronze are never the same. But confused about what SUCCESS is and what constitutes FAILURE to serious-minded people, we thought hosting a tournament and settling for bronze in a year when we were observing our 51st anniversary as an independent nation was an achievement.
Contrary to overwhelming public opinion, which heavily tilted against retaining the services of the Frenchman, a few but powerful people who hold the fate of football administration in the country, buoyed by the support of some people who still do not know the difference between freedom and slavery, decided otherwise. Just as we are about to celebrate the act of serving more the interest of the Frenchman than that of the Black Stars, the man has abandoned us in total disgrace.
Reasons for the coach’s decision have been described as ‘personal’, which is common in diplomatic circles. Snippets of information filtering through the grapevine point to differences over new service conditions and technical matters. The man wants a better salary and complained about the absence of Sellas Tetteh, the Ghanaian former assistant national coach, and Renard Herve, the physical trainer.
If Le Roy is a world renowned coach (as some still ignorantly think he is), why should he worry about a black man who is his assistant being put on another assignment? Is it an admission of the fact that Sellas Tetteh was the man who was doing the hatchet work while he (the coach) took the glory? Is he afraid of exposure as we saw during the Ghana 2008 tournament? Why should he worry about the departure of an expatriate physical trainer? Don’t they have separate agreements and different mandates?
Some of us are struggling hard to come to terms with the philosophy of those who constantly think we cannot register any success or progress without the white man. When it comes to football coaches, I do not find the historical foundations upon which they base their reasoning.
In 1963, barely six years after our political independence, Dr Kwame Nkrumah, the Founder of this nation, reasoned that we could not claim independence when others were going to do things for us. He, therefore, encouraged the late Ohene Djan, the then administrator of sports in the country, to invite young Charles Kumi Gyamfi (C.K. Gyamfi, for short) to come down from Germany where he had just completed a coaching course to prepare the Black Stars for the Africa Cup of Nations being hosted by the country.
If Nkrumah were to have a low esteem of Ghanaians or the black man, for that matter, and knowing him to be a leader who abhorred failures, he would conveniently have settled on a foreign coach, more so when Ghana was playing host. Coach Gyamfi proved Dr Nkrumah and Ohene Djan right that what the white man could do the black man was equal and competent to the task, if not even more. Ghana won its first African Cup at that tournament.
In 1965, Coach C.K. Gyamfi again led the Black Stars to defend the trophy in far away Tunis. It was not after 13 years, in 1978, that Ghana won the continental trophy again. For those who do not know, the coach of that victorious Black Stars team was Osam-Duodu, a full-blooded Ghanaian!
In 1982, when Ghana had the honour of winning the Africa Cup again in Libya, the technical team comprised C.K. Gyamfi (Leader), Osam-Duodu and Isaac K. Afranie. Tell me, those drenched in inferiority complex, where is the case against local coaches?
There is always this loose argument that local coaches need to upgrade their technical skills in order to prove equal to the task. Every profession requires constant upgrading and coaching is not an exemption. What yardstick are they applying? Who says only local coaches need refresher courses? Forty-five years ago we won the continental trophy with a Ghanaian coach and we are talking about deficient technical skills today. Are we being fair to ourselves as human beings?
Twenty-six years ago, in 1982, we won the Africa Cup with a Ghanaian technical team so what are we saying today when, even with a Frenchman on home soil, we could only pat ourselves with worthless bronze? The apologists should tell us what more they expect from our own coaches before according them the respect and dignity they deserve.
Another issue those who do not see their way clear without the torchlight of a white man put across is that local coaches cannot stamp their authority on the team. How do they stamp their authority when their appointments are without contracts? How do they exert authority when every member of the FA is a coach, team owner and player agent, seeking their selfish interests?
I challenge the powerful men in charge of the FA to hand over the Black Stars to a local coach, offering him just half of the 30,000 euros they were paying Le Roy every month; let him sign a performance contract so that he sacks himself when he fails; give him the free hand to pick his supporting staff; give him the freedom to select and dispense with the services of players and give him the funds to spend weeks in Europe scouting for players. He will do more than just putting together already well-cooked players and claim glory for their success.
By now it should be obvious to us that most of these foreign coaches are mercenaries who lack commitment and are only interested in the fortunes they make. Are we surprised, therefore, that Le Roy got attracted to bigger salaries and applied for jobs in South Africa and Cote d’Ivoire.
What we should also realise is that the local coach will share in the glory of success as a national and not just for the fat bonus he will earn. In the same way, he will suffer the gloom of failure as any other Ghanaian and he will carry a bigger burden for not being able to stem defeat, something no amount of money will wash away. That is the difference.
Slavery and colonialism ended many years ago and we need to come out of our hopelessness and inferiority complex. We must cultivate the spirit of self-importance and national pride. We should stop making mockery of our independence by making saviours out of dead white men. In our self-pity mentality, we accept everything that had been rejected in their home countries; people who could hardly be mentioned in their countries are given red-carpet treatment here because we lack self-confidence
Yes, we are in a global village, but movement is not one directional. It seems we are so blinded by our own low self-esteem that we are not aware of this.
It is very disgraceful and embarrassing that it took Sepp Blatter, another white man who is the FIFA President, to tell us in the face that foreign coaches are doing more harm than good to the development of football on the continent. Those so-called football experts, Blatter observed, are earning more than they deserve and their skills do not enhance the performance of the various national teams.
Since we respect Blatter so much and appreciate the good things he has done for African football, much against stiff opposition from his compatriots, are we going to honour him by respecting his views and change for the better? We in Ghana have been taught a bitter lesson by Claude Le Roy. Have we learnt it?
May I have the honour of applauding the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, once again for creating a path which we hope very soon others will follow? We are tired of ‘Nana Dr (Prof Emeritus) so and so’. As Otumfuo observed, big titles do not make a good chief. Our traditional leaders should let their light shine and, title or no title, they will glitter in the eyes of their subjects. Otumfuo, thank you.
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
By Kofi Akordor
There was the story of a man who threatened divorce. The woman went down on her knees and family members and friends intervened. Eventually the disenchanted man gave in and husband and wife shared a common marital bed again. A few days into a reunited alliance, the wife, without warning, deserted camp and left a bewildered husband not only lonely but heavily humiliated. The man regretted ever changing his mind. He was now the person at the receiving end.
Ghana has found itself in a similar unpleasant situation today. In February this year, we had a good opportunity to dispense with the services of Claude Le Roy, the Frenchman who was coach of the Black Stars, for non-performance. The coach was to win gold at the Africa Cup of Nations tournament hosted by Ghana and qualify the Black Stars for the 2010 World Cup to be hosted by South Africa. “Host and Win” was the battle cry and that spelt out in clear terms the working agenda for the coach.
We ended up with bronze, which does not matter, seriously speaking, in such competitions. Gold and bronze are never the same. But confused about what SUCCESS is and what constitutes FAILURE to serious-minded people, we thought hosting a tournament and settling for bronze in a year when we were observing our 51st anniversary as an independent nation was an achievement.
Contrary to overwhelming public opinion, which heavily tilted against retaining the services of the Frenchman, a few but powerful people who hold the fate of football administration in the country, buoyed by the support of some people who still do not know the difference between freedom and slavery, decided otherwise. Just as we are about to celebrate the act of serving more the interest of the Frenchman than that of the Black Stars, the man has abandoned us in total disgrace.
Reasons for the coach’s decision have been described as ‘personal’, which is common in diplomatic circles. Snippets of information filtering through the grapevine point to differences over new service conditions and technical matters. The man wants a better salary and complained about the absence of Sellas Tetteh, the Ghanaian former assistant national coach, and Renard Herve, the physical trainer.
If Le Roy is a world renowned coach (as some still ignorantly think he is), why should he worry about a black man who is his assistant being put on another assignment? Is it an admission of the fact that Sellas Tetteh was the man who was doing the hatchet work while he (the coach) took the glory? Is he afraid of exposure as we saw during the Ghana 2008 tournament? Why should he worry about the departure of an expatriate physical trainer? Don’t they have separate agreements and different mandates?
Some of us are struggling hard to come to terms with the philosophy of those who constantly think we cannot register any success or progress without the white man. When it comes to football coaches, I do not find the historical foundations upon which they base their reasoning.
In 1963, barely six years after our political independence, Dr Kwame Nkrumah, the Founder of this nation, reasoned that we could not claim independence when others were going to do things for us. He, therefore, encouraged the late Ohene Djan, the then administrator of sports in the country, to invite young Charles Kumi Gyamfi (C.K. Gyamfi, for short) to come down from Germany where he had just completed a coaching course to prepare the Black Stars for the Africa Cup of Nations being hosted by the country.
If Nkrumah were to have a low esteem of Ghanaians or the black man, for that matter, and knowing him to be a leader who abhorred failures, he would conveniently have settled on a foreign coach, more so when Ghana was playing host. Coach Gyamfi proved Dr Nkrumah and Ohene Djan right that what the white man could do the black man was equal and competent to the task, if not even more. Ghana won its first African Cup at that tournament.
In 1965, Coach C.K. Gyamfi again led the Black Stars to defend the trophy in far away Tunis. It was not after 13 years, in 1978, that Ghana won the continental trophy again. For those who do not know, the coach of that victorious Black Stars team was Osam-Duodu, a full-blooded Ghanaian!
In 1982, when Ghana had the honour of winning the Africa Cup again in Libya, the technical team comprised C.K. Gyamfi (Leader), Osam-Duodu and Isaac K. Afranie. Tell me, those drenched in inferiority complex, where is the case against local coaches?
There is always this loose argument that local coaches need to upgrade their technical skills in order to prove equal to the task. Every profession requires constant upgrading and coaching is not an exemption. What yardstick are they applying? Who says only local coaches need refresher courses? Forty-five years ago we won the continental trophy with a Ghanaian coach and we are talking about deficient technical skills today. Are we being fair to ourselves as human beings?
Twenty-six years ago, in 1982, we won the Africa Cup with a Ghanaian technical team so what are we saying today when, even with a Frenchman on home soil, we could only pat ourselves with worthless bronze? The apologists should tell us what more they expect from our own coaches before according them the respect and dignity they deserve.
Another issue those who do not see their way clear without the torchlight of a white man put across is that local coaches cannot stamp their authority on the team. How do they stamp their authority when their appointments are without contracts? How do they exert authority when every member of the FA is a coach, team owner and player agent, seeking their selfish interests?
I challenge the powerful men in charge of the FA to hand over the Black Stars to a local coach, offering him just half of the 30,000 euros they were paying Le Roy every month; let him sign a performance contract so that he sacks himself when he fails; give him the free hand to pick his supporting staff; give him the freedom to select and dispense with the services of players and give him the funds to spend weeks in Europe scouting for players. He will do more than just putting together already well-cooked players and claim glory for their success.
By now it should be obvious to us that most of these foreign coaches are mercenaries who lack commitment and are only interested in the fortunes they make. Are we surprised, therefore, that Le Roy got attracted to bigger salaries and applied for jobs in South Africa and Cote d’Ivoire.
What we should also realise is that the local coach will share in the glory of success as a national and not just for the fat bonus he will earn. In the same way, he will suffer the gloom of failure as any other Ghanaian and he will carry a bigger burden for not being able to stem defeat, something no amount of money will wash away. That is the difference.
Slavery and colonialism ended many years ago and we need to come out of our hopelessness and inferiority complex. We must cultivate the spirit of self-importance and national pride. We should stop making mockery of our independence by making saviours out of dead white men. In our self-pity mentality, we accept everything that had been rejected in their home countries; people who could hardly be mentioned in their countries are given red-carpet treatment here because we lack self-confidence
Yes, we are in a global village, but movement is not one directional. It seems we are so blinded by our own low self-esteem that we are not aware of this.
It is very disgraceful and embarrassing that it took Sepp Blatter, another white man who is the FIFA President, to tell us in the face that foreign coaches are doing more harm than good to the development of football on the continent. Those so-called football experts, Blatter observed, are earning more than they deserve and their skills do not enhance the performance of the various national teams.
Since we respect Blatter so much and appreciate the good things he has done for African football, much against stiff opposition from his compatriots, are we going to honour him by respecting his views and change for the better? We in Ghana have been taught a bitter lesson by Claude Le Roy. Have we learnt it?
May I have the honour of applauding the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, once again for creating a path which we hope very soon others will follow? We are tired of ‘Nana Dr (Prof Emeritus) so and so’. As Otumfuo observed, big titles do not make a good chief. Our traditional leaders should let their light shine and, title or no title, they will glitter in the eyes of their subjects. Otumfuo, thank you.
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
Friday, May 9, 2008
Welcome, Ghana Correctional Service
By Kofi Akordor
At the passing-out of new prison officers in Accra about a week ago, the government declared its intention to address the poor conditions in the country’s prisons. This should be good news to those who have a fair knowledge of conditions in our prison facilities.
The Prisons Service, like many other public institutions, has over the years suffered under the proverbial ‘No funds’ syndrome and those who know the system very well, will admit that there is very little correction in our prison system.
Overcrowding, poor sanitation, lack of learning and training facilities have made the prisons more of concentration camps than centres of reformation.
Last year, Daasebre Gyamena, a very popular Ghanaian musician, came out of a London jail proclaiming that he had, during his period of incarceration, composed a number of songs which were soon to be released. According to Gyamena, while in custody, he took advantage of facilities available to take courses in Information Technology and Mathematics, for which he was awarded a certificate. That is where the difference lies.
In Ghana, very few can claim that they came out of our prisons better equipped than when they went in. Some claim spiritual development, which only confirms the physical deprivations they went through while in prison custody. I must admit that I do not have figures to prove it, but most convicts go back to prisons not because they enjoy conditions there, but mostly because they have improved upon their criminal skills and have very little means to lead decent lives.
The workshops that are to transform the unskilled inmates into a pool of employable talents do not exist or at best, lack the necessary equipment and tools and trainers needed to do the transformation. Those with skills and some level of academic qualifications come out stale and rusty because facilities such as libraries to encourage academic discourse are simply not available in our prisons.
These deprivations and the stigma associated with prison life have seriously contributed to the situation where most convicts come out from the prisons ready to exert revenge on society.
Any programme to reform the penal system and turn the prisons into correctional centres should be applauded. My only problem is that this reform is being tied to a change in name. Our penchant for changing the names of our institutions and ministries as part of improving or transforming them is not only disturbing but intriguing. We are told that a draft Prisons Service Law and Regulations which will rename the Ghana Prisons Service as the Ghana Correctional Service is awaiting Presidential assent.
Do we always have to change names before improving conditions in our institutions and making them more effective and relevant to our needs? We know the problems of the Ghana Prisons Service. We know the solutions do not lie in new names. So why do we think by giving an old institution a new name, everything will change for the better overnight?
Take our educational system for example. We have transformed the primary and middle to the junior and senior secondary schools without seeing the fundamental changes we expect in the system. Quite recently, we went further to the junior high and senior high schools with our changing of names without any improvement (change )in infrastructure, facilities and service conditions. So which should be our concern? Changing names or improving facilities?
We have elevated our polytechnics to tertiary status with corresponding upgrading in facilities, academic structure and service conditions. The agitation by the polytechnic graduates for recognition stems from the fact that much work did not go into the upgrading of the polytechnics before going public with the declaration.
We came to realise rather too painfully that it is easier changing a name than living up to that name. Thanks to the Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund), the polytechnics are seeing a lot of improvement in physical infrastructure. But we still have a lot to do to bring them to a level where they can adequately produce the middle-management power of the country, especially in the sciences and technical fields.
Our ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) have changed names several times in recent times so much so that it will be difficult for any examiner to attempt posing a question like; “How many ministries do we have in Ghana?” in any examination and expect the students to pass. It will even be more difficult if the students were asked to name those ministries. By separation, attachment or elimination, we have created so many ministries in so short a time as if that is the panacea for our problems.
For just one sector, there have been different ministries. For instance, the energy sector alone has seen many ministries including, Fuel and Power; Fuel and Energy; Energy and Mines and we are still searching. There is, or were once, Ministry of Transport and Communications; Ministry of Roads and Transport; Ministry of Roads and Highways and those readers can remember. These changes are not reflecting on the standard of roads which the ministries are to tackle anyway.
We once had the Ministry of Trade and Industries. It became Trade and Tourism; then Tourism and Modernisation of the Capital City (many might have forgotten this); Tourism and Diasporan Relations and those to follow.
What is Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA) when agriculture is all about food anyway? With every change in ministerial name comes shuffling of staff, redesignation of officers, and change in name or transfer of departments from one ministry to another.
We have done it so much that sometimes members of the public and the business community do not find their way clear as to which ministry to do business with. A road contractor may shuttle between the Ministry of Roads and Highways and the Ministry of Transport, for even though it may sound simple, sometimes, one file for a particular project may be in one ministry while another file on the same project may be in the cabinet of another ministry.
Such is our obsession with bureaucracy that we spend more time creating new and renaming ministries instead of ensuring that the existing ones do the right thing. This is the fear I harbour for the Ghana Correctional Service, which is to replace the Ghana Prisons Service. It may end up as a change in name but the service will remain the same. I think it is time we end up somewhere and begin to understand that names do not do the work and creating and recreating ministries will not change our fortunes if our vision and attitude do not change. Somebody may ask; “What is in a name”?
At the passing-out of new prison officers in Accra about a week ago, the government declared its intention to address the poor conditions in the country’s prisons. This should be good news to those who have a fair knowledge of conditions in our prison facilities.
The Prisons Service, like many other public institutions, has over the years suffered under the proverbial ‘No funds’ syndrome and those who know the system very well, will admit that there is very little correction in our prison system.
Overcrowding, poor sanitation, lack of learning and training facilities have made the prisons more of concentration camps than centres of reformation.
Last year, Daasebre Gyamena, a very popular Ghanaian musician, came out of a London jail proclaiming that he had, during his period of incarceration, composed a number of songs which were soon to be released. According to Gyamena, while in custody, he took advantage of facilities available to take courses in Information Technology and Mathematics, for which he was awarded a certificate. That is where the difference lies.
In Ghana, very few can claim that they came out of our prisons better equipped than when they went in. Some claim spiritual development, which only confirms the physical deprivations they went through while in prison custody. I must admit that I do not have figures to prove it, but most convicts go back to prisons not because they enjoy conditions there, but mostly because they have improved upon their criminal skills and have very little means to lead decent lives.
The workshops that are to transform the unskilled inmates into a pool of employable talents do not exist or at best, lack the necessary equipment and tools and trainers needed to do the transformation. Those with skills and some level of academic qualifications come out stale and rusty because facilities such as libraries to encourage academic discourse are simply not available in our prisons.
These deprivations and the stigma associated with prison life have seriously contributed to the situation where most convicts come out from the prisons ready to exert revenge on society.
Any programme to reform the penal system and turn the prisons into correctional centres should be applauded. My only problem is that this reform is being tied to a change in name. Our penchant for changing the names of our institutions and ministries as part of improving or transforming them is not only disturbing but intriguing. We are told that a draft Prisons Service Law and Regulations which will rename the Ghana Prisons Service as the Ghana Correctional Service is awaiting Presidential assent.
Do we always have to change names before improving conditions in our institutions and making them more effective and relevant to our needs? We know the problems of the Ghana Prisons Service. We know the solutions do not lie in new names. So why do we think by giving an old institution a new name, everything will change for the better overnight?
Take our educational system for example. We have transformed the primary and middle to the junior and senior secondary schools without seeing the fundamental changes we expect in the system. Quite recently, we went further to the junior high and senior high schools with our changing of names without any improvement (change )in infrastructure, facilities and service conditions. So which should be our concern? Changing names or improving facilities?
We have elevated our polytechnics to tertiary status with corresponding upgrading in facilities, academic structure and service conditions. The agitation by the polytechnic graduates for recognition stems from the fact that much work did not go into the upgrading of the polytechnics before going public with the declaration.
We came to realise rather too painfully that it is easier changing a name than living up to that name. Thanks to the Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund), the polytechnics are seeing a lot of improvement in physical infrastructure. But we still have a lot to do to bring them to a level where they can adequately produce the middle-management power of the country, especially in the sciences and technical fields.
Our ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) have changed names several times in recent times so much so that it will be difficult for any examiner to attempt posing a question like; “How many ministries do we have in Ghana?” in any examination and expect the students to pass. It will even be more difficult if the students were asked to name those ministries. By separation, attachment or elimination, we have created so many ministries in so short a time as if that is the panacea for our problems.
For just one sector, there have been different ministries. For instance, the energy sector alone has seen many ministries including, Fuel and Power; Fuel and Energy; Energy and Mines and we are still searching. There is, or were once, Ministry of Transport and Communications; Ministry of Roads and Transport; Ministry of Roads and Highways and those readers can remember. These changes are not reflecting on the standard of roads which the ministries are to tackle anyway.
We once had the Ministry of Trade and Industries. It became Trade and Tourism; then Tourism and Modernisation of the Capital City (many might have forgotten this); Tourism and Diasporan Relations and those to follow.
What is Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA) when agriculture is all about food anyway? With every change in ministerial name comes shuffling of staff, redesignation of officers, and change in name or transfer of departments from one ministry to another.
We have done it so much that sometimes members of the public and the business community do not find their way clear as to which ministry to do business with. A road contractor may shuttle between the Ministry of Roads and Highways and the Ministry of Transport, for even though it may sound simple, sometimes, one file for a particular project may be in one ministry while another file on the same project may be in the cabinet of another ministry.
Such is our obsession with bureaucracy that we spend more time creating new and renaming ministries instead of ensuring that the existing ones do the right thing. This is the fear I harbour for the Ghana Correctional Service, which is to replace the Ghana Prisons Service. It may end up as a change in name but the service will remain the same. I think it is time we end up somewhere and begin to understand that names do not do the work and creating and recreating ministries will not change our fortunes if our vision and attitude do not change. Somebody may ask; “What is in a name”?
Travelling without seeing
By Kofi Akordor
OUR taxi and tro-tro drivers have a culture of having simple but thought-provoking inscriptions on their vehicles. Some common ones are : “One man no chop”; “Poor no vex”; “No pain no gain’; “Work and happiness’”; “Shame unto my enemies”; “I shall return”; “Friends today, enemies tomorrow”.
Sometimes it is easy to tell what motivated vehicle owners of drivers to inscribe these things on their vehicles. Other times too, it is obvious that the brain behind the inscription is expressing appreciation for a goodwill gesture, denouncing someone for his/her wickedness or simply giving an advice.
Africans generally, and Ghanaians in particular, value words and these simple inscriptions have come to epitomise the African’s appreciation of wise sayings which have useful lessons for all. Among the Ibos of Nigeria, as captured by the great Chinua Achebe in his book; Things Fall Apart, ‘proverbs are the palm oil with which words are eaten’.
The Ibos are not alone in this regard. This is a common trait among Africans whereby statements are embellished with proverbs, idiomatic expressions and wise sayings to the extent that by the time the speaker ends, the venom in the message would have evaporated. This is especially so if they have to break sad news about death or any other calamity.
These taxis and tro-tros have become mobile signboards which constantly remind us of certain important truths in the world or unmanned pulpits from which divine words such as; “Forgive and forget”, spew out which, when applied in our daily lives will encourage us to do more than we are doing, reform us and generally serve a useful purpose of changing things for the better.
One inscription I find very fascinating is; “Travel and see”. This is quite simple and straight to the point. Why do we have to travel and see? There is a saying, which loosely translated means a child who does not travel always believes his mother’s soup is the best. This means that it is good to travel not only to see things, but to taste, feel and experience other things by other people.
Travelling expands our horizon, deepens our knowledge, frees us from ignorance and makes us wiser. Travelling enables us to appreciate the diversity of nature and gives us the opportunity to learn from the experience of others. If for instance, Community A, has been battling with erosion for years and through travelling, the members of that community have been able to study how members of Community B, have managed their erosion problem, Community A would have benefited from travelling by learning from Community B.
We may realise, as we travel, that what we consider as a delicacy is abhorred by others or vice versa. That manifests the greatness of God the Creator who made all things possible.
The question is; do we really see anything when we travel? Do we admire beautiful things and learn any useful things from our hosts when we travel? Do we carry any positive images of ourselves to our hosts which they may also want to emulate? Or do we only travel and see, admire, enjoy and return to remain in the past?
You may blame ignorance on the part of that innocent child who had never travelled for concluding that his mother’s soup is the best. What about the person who has travelled widely and has seen things done differently? In the example given in the erosion case of Community A, what would be the excuse if after seeing how the people of Community B have solved the problem, they continue to allow erosion to wash away their beautiful towns and villages?
Notwithstanding our precarious finances, our government officials have had their fair share of foreign travels and we expect the nation to benefit from their experiences. Unfortunately as it seems now, apart from personal gains, the nation hardly derives any benefit from the numerous travels by our government officials, from the President of the Republic to the ordinary civil servant at the district level. Sometimes I am tempted to ask myself; what are we trying to tell the rest of the world? You arrive at Kotoka, our only international airport, and a few metres away; the first traffic intersection you encounter is in chaos because the traffic lights are not working? And this is not a once-in-a while situation but a regular daily phenomenon, yet no one seems to care.
We do not need to make reference to the US, Britain, Germany or France, because these are generations ahead of us. Is this what our big men and women see when they step out of their aircraft in Seoul, Kuala Lumpur and other Third World capitals?
Ghana is not alone in the energy crisis so if the traffic lights of others are working, why can’t we ask our hosts how they have been able to solve matters instead of just admiring things with glee and returning home with no determination to change a bad situation for the better.
Our leaders never fail to tell us the impressive things they saw in their foreign travels. What they fail to tell us is how they are going to replicate those beautiful things here. I think national pride alone will dictate that at least some of our traffic lights at strategic and busy intersections will be removed from the national grid and hooked to a solar system.
There is one such traffic light on the Kanda Highway, which since its installation about four years ago has been functioning . A national endeavour to do a similar thing at some of our major intersections will save the nation the embarrassment of the chaotic situations at traffic intersections and the consequent accidents which result in deaths, injuries and destructions to properties. Are we going to hide behind poverty to remain in this jungle, 51 years after independence?
Playing host to certain international events is an opportunity to overhaul existing infrastructure, the building of new ones to serve as a historical reminder of the event as well as creating opportunities for economic, social and industrial growth. Almost all nations use such occasions to build showpieces which showcase the country’s development and boosts its image in the comity of nations.
When South Korea offered to host the 1988 Olympic Games, it took advantage of it to embark on a massive re-development programme for Seoul, the host city and the rest of the country. A new international airport was built far from the city centre with road network to make movement not only easy but pleasant to visitors.
We had a similar opportunity, albeit on a smaller scale when we were hosts to the rest of the continent during the Ghana 2008 CAF Tournament. We could have used the tournament to build a modern stadium at a new site with modern road network, hotels and other modern infrastructure which could open up our capital city and made it ready to host future international sporting events. Instead, we took the short-cut by refurbishing an existing one in an old part of the city where modern development is virtually nil.
We saw the blunder committed when spectators had to park their vehicles as far away as the Children’s Park with the dangers and inconveniences entailed and walk to the Ohene Djan Stadium. That new stadium, if it had been built, could have been a monumental jubilee gift to the nation. In any case an opportunity has been lost.
I read a colleague, Adwoa Serwaa Bonsu’s account of her experience in China, where she visited recently to cover the Miss Tourism Queen International (MTQI) pageant and wondered when we shall stop paying lip-service to tourism development in the country?
From her account, the Chinese are not only concentrating on industry and commerce as they continue to capture the attention of the world. They are making sure that whoever comes to their country for whatever reason goes home with fond memories.
What are we doing here? We have a whole Ministry of Tourism and Diasporean Relations (whatever that means) but try visiting Boti Falls in the Eastern Region and what should be a pleasurable trip becomes a nightmare. When you finally get there, you do not see any addition to what nature has graciously given us free of charge.
Many have heard of Dodi Island and are dreaming of spending a weekend family holiday there. You may join the Dodi Princess operated by the Volta Lake Transport Company at any weekend to the island. Your dreams will, however, evaporate into thin air and you will be left open-mouthed. Here is a beautiful island surrounded by a beautiful lake formed as a result of the Volta Dam at Akosombo. Beyond that, NOTHING. Not even a lonely sign post to welcome you to the famous Dodi Island. And we have a Ministry of Tourism with all its bureaucratic paraphernalia in place.
As it is now, our tourism development does not take the visitor beyond the slave dungeons at the Cape Coast Castle, Elmina Castle and other such colonial relics. Our beautiful coastline has become dumping grounds for human waste and drug addicts. Our tourism potentials in the regions are not accessible to the locals let alone to foreigners. A few seminars and workshops for hoteliers and caterers here and there, and we are in tourism development.
Are we saying our big men and women, do not see how others are developing the tourism industry in their countries when they travel ouside? Why should our business tycoons and rich politicians decide to go to foreign lands for holidays, when a few days at a mountain resort on the Kwahu or Amedzofe mountains; a weekend on the numerous islands in the Volta Lake after a few hours’ cruise on the lake; enjoying a clean air at the Mole Game Reserve in the north or closer here— the Game Reserve at the Shai Hills will do the trick? The country abounds in many tourism potentials that I need not attempt mentioning here. Those moneys, some of which were siphoned from our national coffers anyway, could have remained here , built the economy and offered jobs to the youth.
All we need is basic infrastructure including good access roads, camping facilities such as lodges and hotels, recreational facilities for both children and adults and adequate information on where to go to enjoy and feel relaxed. When we begin to enjoy the gifts of Nature in our own land , it will not take long before others join to savour a good weather, clean environment and a friendly people. Who knows, we may not even need a whole ministry to develop and promote tourism.
As it is now, we are travelling all right but it is as if we are not seeing anything or even if we see, we do not learn. Is that the reason we are still so far away from those who were in the same trench with us at independence?
Kofiakordor.blogspot.com
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
OUR taxi and tro-tro drivers have a culture of having simple but thought-provoking inscriptions on their vehicles. Some common ones are : “One man no chop”; “Poor no vex”; “No pain no gain’; “Work and happiness’”; “Shame unto my enemies”; “I shall return”; “Friends today, enemies tomorrow”.
Sometimes it is easy to tell what motivated vehicle owners of drivers to inscribe these things on their vehicles. Other times too, it is obvious that the brain behind the inscription is expressing appreciation for a goodwill gesture, denouncing someone for his/her wickedness or simply giving an advice.
Africans generally, and Ghanaians in particular, value words and these simple inscriptions have come to epitomise the African’s appreciation of wise sayings which have useful lessons for all. Among the Ibos of Nigeria, as captured by the great Chinua Achebe in his book; Things Fall Apart, ‘proverbs are the palm oil with which words are eaten’.
The Ibos are not alone in this regard. This is a common trait among Africans whereby statements are embellished with proverbs, idiomatic expressions and wise sayings to the extent that by the time the speaker ends, the venom in the message would have evaporated. This is especially so if they have to break sad news about death or any other calamity.
These taxis and tro-tros have become mobile signboards which constantly remind us of certain important truths in the world or unmanned pulpits from which divine words such as; “Forgive and forget”, spew out which, when applied in our daily lives will encourage us to do more than we are doing, reform us and generally serve a useful purpose of changing things for the better.
One inscription I find very fascinating is; “Travel and see”. This is quite simple and straight to the point. Why do we have to travel and see? There is a saying, which loosely translated means a child who does not travel always believes his mother’s soup is the best. This means that it is good to travel not only to see things, but to taste, feel and experience other things by other people.
Travelling expands our horizon, deepens our knowledge, frees us from ignorance and makes us wiser. Travelling enables us to appreciate the diversity of nature and gives us the opportunity to learn from the experience of others. If for instance, Community A, has been battling with erosion for years and through travelling, the members of that community have been able to study how members of Community B, have managed their erosion problem, Community A would have benefited from travelling by learning from Community B.
We may realise, as we travel, that what we consider as a delicacy is abhorred by others or vice versa. That manifests the greatness of God the Creator who made all things possible.
The question is; do we really see anything when we travel? Do we admire beautiful things and learn any useful things from our hosts when we travel? Do we carry any positive images of ourselves to our hosts which they may also want to emulate? Or do we only travel and see, admire, enjoy and return to remain in the past?
You may blame ignorance on the part of that innocent child who had never travelled for concluding that his mother’s soup is the best. What about the person who has travelled widely and has seen things done differently? In the example given in the erosion case of Community A, what would be the excuse if after seeing how the people of Community B have solved the problem, they continue to allow erosion to wash away their beautiful towns and villages?
Notwithstanding our precarious finances, our government officials have had their fair share of foreign travels and we expect the nation to benefit from their experiences. Unfortunately as it seems now, apart from personal gains, the nation hardly derives any benefit from the numerous travels by our government officials, from the President of the Republic to the ordinary civil servant at the district level. Sometimes I am tempted to ask myself; what are we trying to tell the rest of the world? You arrive at Kotoka, our only international airport, and a few metres away; the first traffic intersection you encounter is in chaos because the traffic lights are not working? And this is not a once-in-a while situation but a regular daily phenomenon, yet no one seems to care.
We do not need to make reference to the US, Britain, Germany or France, because these are generations ahead of us. Is this what our big men and women see when they step out of their aircraft in Seoul, Kuala Lumpur and other Third World capitals?
Ghana is not alone in the energy crisis so if the traffic lights of others are working, why can’t we ask our hosts how they have been able to solve matters instead of just admiring things with glee and returning home with no determination to change a bad situation for the better.
Our leaders never fail to tell us the impressive things they saw in their foreign travels. What they fail to tell us is how they are going to replicate those beautiful things here. I think national pride alone will dictate that at least some of our traffic lights at strategic and busy intersections will be removed from the national grid and hooked to a solar system.
There is one such traffic light on the Kanda Highway, which since its installation about four years ago has been functioning . A national endeavour to do a similar thing at some of our major intersections will save the nation the embarrassment of the chaotic situations at traffic intersections and the consequent accidents which result in deaths, injuries and destructions to properties. Are we going to hide behind poverty to remain in this jungle, 51 years after independence?
Playing host to certain international events is an opportunity to overhaul existing infrastructure, the building of new ones to serve as a historical reminder of the event as well as creating opportunities for economic, social and industrial growth. Almost all nations use such occasions to build showpieces which showcase the country’s development and boosts its image in the comity of nations.
When South Korea offered to host the 1988 Olympic Games, it took advantage of it to embark on a massive re-development programme for Seoul, the host city and the rest of the country. A new international airport was built far from the city centre with road network to make movement not only easy but pleasant to visitors.
We had a similar opportunity, albeit on a smaller scale when we were hosts to the rest of the continent during the Ghana 2008 CAF Tournament. We could have used the tournament to build a modern stadium at a new site with modern road network, hotels and other modern infrastructure which could open up our capital city and made it ready to host future international sporting events. Instead, we took the short-cut by refurbishing an existing one in an old part of the city where modern development is virtually nil.
We saw the blunder committed when spectators had to park their vehicles as far away as the Children’s Park with the dangers and inconveniences entailed and walk to the Ohene Djan Stadium. That new stadium, if it had been built, could have been a monumental jubilee gift to the nation. In any case an opportunity has been lost.
I read a colleague, Adwoa Serwaa Bonsu’s account of her experience in China, where she visited recently to cover the Miss Tourism Queen International (MTQI) pageant and wondered when we shall stop paying lip-service to tourism development in the country?
From her account, the Chinese are not only concentrating on industry and commerce as they continue to capture the attention of the world. They are making sure that whoever comes to their country for whatever reason goes home with fond memories.
What are we doing here? We have a whole Ministry of Tourism and Diasporean Relations (whatever that means) but try visiting Boti Falls in the Eastern Region and what should be a pleasurable trip becomes a nightmare. When you finally get there, you do not see any addition to what nature has graciously given us free of charge.
Many have heard of Dodi Island and are dreaming of spending a weekend family holiday there. You may join the Dodi Princess operated by the Volta Lake Transport Company at any weekend to the island. Your dreams will, however, evaporate into thin air and you will be left open-mouthed. Here is a beautiful island surrounded by a beautiful lake formed as a result of the Volta Dam at Akosombo. Beyond that, NOTHING. Not even a lonely sign post to welcome you to the famous Dodi Island. And we have a Ministry of Tourism with all its bureaucratic paraphernalia in place.
As it is now, our tourism development does not take the visitor beyond the slave dungeons at the Cape Coast Castle, Elmina Castle and other such colonial relics. Our beautiful coastline has become dumping grounds for human waste and drug addicts. Our tourism potentials in the regions are not accessible to the locals let alone to foreigners. A few seminars and workshops for hoteliers and caterers here and there, and we are in tourism development.
Are we saying our big men and women, do not see how others are developing the tourism industry in their countries when they travel ouside? Why should our business tycoons and rich politicians decide to go to foreign lands for holidays, when a few days at a mountain resort on the Kwahu or Amedzofe mountains; a weekend on the numerous islands in the Volta Lake after a few hours’ cruise on the lake; enjoying a clean air at the Mole Game Reserve in the north or closer here— the Game Reserve at the Shai Hills will do the trick? The country abounds in many tourism potentials that I need not attempt mentioning here. Those moneys, some of which were siphoned from our national coffers anyway, could have remained here , built the economy and offered jobs to the youth.
All we need is basic infrastructure including good access roads, camping facilities such as lodges and hotels, recreational facilities for both children and adults and adequate information on where to go to enjoy and feel relaxed. When we begin to enjoy the gifts of Nature in our own land , it will not take long before others join to savour a good weather, clean environment and a friendly people. Who knows, we may not even need a whole ministry to develop and promote tourism.
As it is now, we are travelling all right but it is as if we are not seeing anything or even if we see, we do not learn. Is that the reason we are still so far away from those who were in the same trench with us at independence?
Kofiakordor.blogspot.com
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
African leaders in another vain Golden Fleece chase
By Kofi Akordor
Last week, in characteristic fashion, 14 African leaders left their national capitals in chase of the ever-elusive Golden Fleece. This time the expected lucky ground is New Delhi, the Indian capital and among those who attended were the leaders of South Africa, Tanzania, Algeria, Kenya, Egypt and Ghana.
One of the reasons for the gathering for what was dubbed the India-Africa Forum summit was, as expected, to bolster trade and political ties between India and Africa for the mutual benefit of their people. African countries carried to the forum what they have in abundance and which they showcase at such international fora — rich natural resources including strategic minerals such as uranium, which is a vital component in the nuclear industry, vast deposits of oil, gold, timber and many others without any added value, in addition to a vast market ready to be exploited.
The Indian leaders for their part told the African leaders what they always want to hear, that is, aid packages and investment opportunities. India has already pledged to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in development projects on the continent. This includes US$500 million in grants for development projects over the next five to six years.
India also pledged to double its line credit to African countries and regional economic groupings from US$2.15 billion currently to US$5.4 billion; allow duty-free imports from the poorest of the poor countries and provide preferential market access for exports from 50 least developed countries (LDC) of which 34 come from Africa.
With such tantalising offers one would expect African leaders to return to their capitals with broad smiles all over their face. But is that the reality? What India failed to tell the African leaders directly or openly was that India desperately needs Africa’s vast resources to support its growing industrial and technological advancement and to open bigger markets for its products in pharmaceuticals, automobiles, electronics and information technology.
Even though the doors to these fora are open to African countries as equal partners trying to shape mutual strategies with their hosts for common benefits, the end results do not support this position.
The Indian Minister of State for External Affairs, Anand Sharma, in trying to debunk the notion that the New Delhi Forum was just another give-and-take affair, said the summit was a mere way for India and Africa to strengthen their bilateral ties and work together in the future as partners.
However, there are many who could not be convinced by such assurances. Mr Francois Moloi, South Africa’s High Commissioner to India, must have been speaking for the rest of the continent, when he observed that “Africa is no longer interested in economic partners who have a colonial mindset, or are looking just to exploit our natural resources”. He went on: “We want investment in our nation and we welcome economic partners — but it is also about developing a partnership for the long term, not just to have companies or countries come in and raid our country and then leave”.
This is not the first time African leaders have carried their problems to other continents for solution. On November 4 and 5, 2006, 49 African leaders gathered in Beijing, the Chinese capital, for the forum on China-Africa co-operation. At the end of that forum, the leaders from both continents proclaimed the establishment of a new type of strategic partnership between China and Africa.
China, like India, also signed agreements on agriculture and fishery, economic, energy and oil exploration with many African countries. Again, it was said that the Beijing Summit was to serve as a platform for the collective consultation and dialogue as well as co-operation mechanism for equal and benefits to the two partners.
Other objectives of the Beijing Summit include deepening and broadening mutually beneficial co-operation, encouraging and promoting two-way trade and investment, exploring new modes of co-operation and giving top priority to co-operation in agriculture, infrastructure, industry, fishery, IT, public health and personnel training to draw on one another’s strengths for the benefit of their people.
The Beijing Summit had gone ahead to set a trade target between Africa and China to reach US$100 billion by 2010, which as at the end of last year stood at US$73 billion. China has also pledged a package of aid and assistance measures to Africa, including US$3 billion in preferential loans over a three-year period and the exemption of more debt owed by poor African countries.
China as an emerging economy like India needs more resources including oil to fuel its growing industries and market for its products including textiles, automobiles, pharmaceuticals and electronics.
At the close of the year, from December 8 to 9, 2007, African leaders met their European counterparts in Portugal at the Lisbon Summit, again, to put the African problem on the international agenda. To remove any doubts of master-servant relationship, Mr Louis Michel, European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid and for Relations with Africa, Caribbean and Pacific countries, had this to say: “Europe and Africa are natural allies. An indispensable partnership, strong and sincere between these two large and beautiful continents, can build a future of peace and prosperity. Together they can decisively create a new world order, fairer, more equitable and freer”. How I wish these words were true!
The Lisbon Summit also prepared the grounds for the Joint EU/Africa Strategy and Action Plan which is to provide a long-term vision for a strategic partnership between Africa and the EU for the benefit of the people of the two continents.
The hollowness of Mr Michel’s words did not take long to manifest, when the Lisbon Summit ended on a rather acrimonious note over trade deals between the two continents. What generated the acrimony were the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), designed to replace the then existing deals with African countries. The EU said if African countries failed to sign the EPAs, they could lose tariff-free access to European markets under rules laid down by the World Trade Organization (WTO).
The African voice against the EPAs was raised by President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal and supported by President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa.
The two mentioned so far, according to objective analysts, have a common agenda. The hosts are more interested in Africa’s resources than in anything else. The Europeans feel they have been overtaken by events, following China’s emergence as a dominant economic power and are therefore ready to stake a strong claim on a big chunk of Africa’s resources. So the Lisbon Summit was mainly to help the Europeans retain what they have and expand their sphere of influence in the world’s richest naturally resourced continent.
There is a strong reason for China’s overtures to Africa and so is India’s, with India right at the heels of China, jostling for position in the new order of things. The question then is, Why should African leaders take delight trooping to other continents for solutions when their countries have all that others do not have? Why should they be the beggars when they are in a stronger position to determine how and where the bargaining should go?
China and India are two countries that made it without making themselves visitors at every economic forum in other countries and they made it without a fraction of what Africa is endowed with in terms of natural resources. What they have in abundance and which African countries must begin to cultivate are proper planning, foresight, setting of priorities, patriotism, determination, self-reliance and the will power not to play second fiddle to any external power.
If African countries can close their ranks, forge ahead in singleness of purpose and plan to utilise their resources meaningfully for development, they will not need all these pledges which at the end of the day will only entangle them the more in economic and political quagmire. Africa’s quest for solutions to its development cannot be found in foreign capitals but right here, deep in the mineral rich forests, ocean beds and beautiful coastline, given a more focused, incorrupt and visionary political leadership that is prepared to appreciate and utilise the tremendous human resource at its disposal. Until then, the objectives of these so-called international fora on mutual partnership and co-operation will remain a mirage that will not bring the Golden Fleece.
Last week, in characteristic fashion, 14 African leaders left their national capitals in chase of the ever-elusive Golden Fleece. This time the expected lucky ground is New Delhi, the Indian capital and among those who attended were the leaders of South Africa, Tanzania, Algeria, Kenya, Egypt and Ghana.
One of the reasons for the gathering for what was dubbed the India-Africa Forum summit was, as expected, to bolster trade and political ties between India and Africa for the mutual benefit of their people. African countries carried to the forum what they have in abundance and which they showcase at such international fora — rich natural resources including strategic minerals such as uranium, which is a vital component in the nuclear industry, vast deposits of oil, gold, timber and many others without any added value, in addition to a vast market ready to be exploited.
The Indian leaders for their part told the African leaders what they always want to hear, that is, aid packages and investment opportunities. India has already pledged to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in development projects on the continent. This includes US$500 million in grants for development projects over the next five to six years.
India also pledged to double its line credit to African countries and regional economic groupings from US$2.15 billion currently to US$5.4 billion; allow duty-free imports from the poorest of the poor countries and provide preferential market access for exports from 50 least developed countries (LDC) of which 34 come from Africa.
With such tantalising offers one would expect African leaders to return to their capitals with broad smiles all over their face. But is that the reality? What India failed to tell the African leaders directly or openly was that India desperately needs Africa’s vast resources to support its growing industrial and technological advancement and to open bigger markets for its products in pharmaceuticals, automobiles, electronics and information technology.
Even though the doors to these fora are open to African countries as equal partners trying to shape mutual strategies with their hosts for common benefits, the end results do not support this position.
The Indian Minister of State for External Affairs, Anand Sharma, in trying to debunk the notion that the New Delhi Forum was just another give-and-take affair, said the summit was a mere way for India and Africa to strengthen their bilateral ties and work together in the future as partners.
However, there are many who could not be convinced by such assurances. Mr Francois Moloi, South Africa’s High Commissioner to India, must have been speaking for the rest of the continent, when he observed that “Africa is no longer interested in economic partners who have a colonial mindset, or are looking just to exploit our natural resources”. He went on: “We want investment in our nation and we welcome economic partners — but it is also about developing a partnership for the long term, not just to have companies or countries come in and raid our country and then leave”.
This is not the first time African leaders have carried their problems to other continents for solution. On November 4 and 5, 2006, 49 African leaders gathered in Beijing, the Chinese capital, for the forum on China-Africa co-operation. At the end of that forum, the leaders from both continents proclaimed the establishment of a new type of strategic partnership between China and Africa.
China, like India, also signed agreements on agriculture and fishery, economic, energy and oil exploration with many African countries. Again, it was said that the Beijing Summit was to serve as a platform for the collective consultation and dialogue as well as co-operation mechanism for equal and benefits to the two partners.
Other objectives of the Beijing Summit include deepening and broadening mutually beneficial co-operation, encouraging and promoting two-way trade and investment, exploring new modes of co-operation and giving top priority to co-operation in agriculture, infrastructure, industry, fishery, IT, public health and personnel training to draw on one another’s strengths for the benefit of their people.
The Beijing Summit had gone ahead to set a trade target between Africa and China to reach US$100 billion by 2010, which as at the end of last year stood at US$73 billion. China has also pledged a package of aid and assistance measures to Africa, including US$3 billion in preferential loans over a three-year period and the exemption of more debt owed by poor African countries.
China as an emerging economy like India needs more resources including oil to fuel its growing industries and market for its products including textiles, automobiles, pharmaceuticals and electronics.
At the close of the year, from December 8 to 9, 2007, African leaders met their European counterparts in Portugal at the Lisbon Summit, again, to put the African problem on the international agenda. To remove any doubts of master-servant relationship, Mr Louis Michel, European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid and for Relations with Africa, Caribbean and Pacific countries, had this to say: “Europe and Africa are natural allies. An indispensable partnership, strong and sincere between these two large and beautiful continents, can build a future of peace and prosperity. Together they can decisively create a new world order, fairer, more equitable and freer”. How I wish these words were true!
The Lisbon Summit also prepared the grounds for the Joint EU/Africa Strategy and Action Plan which is to provide a long-term vision for a strategic partnership between Africa and the EU for the benefit of the people of the two continents.
The hollowness of Mr Michel’s words did not take long to manifest, when the Lisbon Summit ended on a rather acrimonious note over trade deals between the two continents. What generated the acrimony were the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), designed to replace the then existing deals with African countries. The EU said if African countries failed to sign the EPAs, they could lose tariff-free access to European markets under rules laid down by the World Trade Organization (WTO).
The African voice against the EPAs was raised by President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal and supported by President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa.
The two mentioned so far, according to objective analysts, have a common agenda. The hosts are more interested in Africa’s resources than in anything else. The Europeans feel they have been overtaken by events, following China’s emergence as a dominant economic power and are therefore ready to stake a strong claim on a big chunk of Africa’s resources. So the Lisbon Summit was mainly to help the Europeans retain what they have and expand their sphere of influence in the world’s richest naturally resourced continent.
There is a strong reason for China’s overtures to Africa and so is India’s, with India right at the heels of China, jostling for position in the new order of things. The question then is, Why should African leaders take delight trooping to other continents for solutions when their countries have all that others do not have? Why should they be the beggars when they are in a stronger position to determine how and where the bargaining should go?
China and India are two countries that made it without making themselves visitors at every economic forum in other countries and they made it without a fraction of what Africa is endowed with in terms of natural resources. What they have in abundance and which African countries must begin to cultivate are proper planning, foresight, setting of priorities, patriotism, determination, self-reliance and the will power not to play second fiddle to any external power.
If African countries can close their ranks, forge ahead in singleness of purpose and plan to utilise their resources meaningfully for development, they will not need all these pledges which at the end of the day will only entangle them the more in economic and political quagmire. Africa’s quest for solutions to its development cannot be found in foreign capitals but right here, deep in the mineral rich forests, ocean beds and beautiful coastline, given a more focused, incorrupt and visionary political leadership that is prepared to appreciate and utilise the tremendous human resource at its disposal. Until then, the objectives of these so-called international fora on mutual partnership and co-operation will remain a mirage that will not bring the Golden Fleece.
Food riots and national security
By Kofi Akordor
ON April 12, 1980, Master-Sergeant Samuel Kanyon Doe, then 39 years, shot himself into the Executive Mansion, Monrovia, the capital of Liberia. The then President William R. Tolbert Jnr. and his entire cabinet were slaughtered to herald what became one of Africa’s bloodiest military coups. Even though there were several underlying factors, what delivered the coup-de-grace was what was referred to as the Rice Riots of 1979. That was the year there were serious food shortages in Liberia and rice, the staple of Liberians, became scarce. You may not believe it, but inadequate rice supply brought a person like Doe to power in Liberia and subsequently created other characters like Charles Taylor and the rest in history
In 1991, Frederick Chiluba, a former bus conductor and trade unionist led a party to sweep Kenneth Kaunda out of office through a landslide victory, thanks to a serious economic downslide including an acute shortage of maize which constitute the basic food of most Zambians.
This year, the writing is clear on the wall – the world is going to suffer serious shortages, if the food-related riots in Haiti, Cote d’Ivoire, Egypt, the Philippines and Indonesia are anything to go by. Apart from the global situation, the World Food Programme (WFP) has predicted that 27 sub-Saharan countries need help in respect of food shortages.
The President of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, has raised the alarm bells already, with the declaration that about 100 million people in poor countries, mostly in Africa, could be pushed deeper into poverty by spiraling prices. The World Bank, in response to this threatening calamity, has announced some emergency measures including the doubling of loans to African farmers.
The President of the United States of America, George W. Bush, has also ordered the release of US$200 million in emergency aid to alleviate food shortages in Africa and other parts of the world.
Apart from these temporary relieves, what is Africa doing about the food situation, in view of the fact that the continent has lived with food shortages over the years? Africa has battled food shortages and famine for several reasons. These could be either natural or what could be described as self-inflicted... Excessive wars, military strife and military coups have had their toll on food production in many parts of the continent.
Countries such as Liberia, Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Eritrea, Rwanda, Ethiopia and Cote d’Ivoire which have experienced civil wars and social conflicts have traditionally experienced food shortages of varied degrees.
Climatic conditions such as drought and floods and pestilences have also affected food production in many countries, especially of those in the Sahelian region and East Africa.
Notwithstanding these natural factors, Africa’s problems which include inadequate food production have been largely the combination of irresponsible political leadership, which has long term effect on food security, under investment in rural economies where agricultural activities take place and unfair international trade barriers which frustrate local farmers.
While many African governments make a lot of noise about increasing agricultural output, the situation on the ground suggests differently. Many food growing areas are not accessible to the marketing centres. This coupled with inadequate storage and preservation facilities means even the little that is produced go waste and never reach the consumers.
In Ghana, the construction of silos which were initiated during the Nkrumah era were never completed because of the political twist given to the enterprise by those in opposition at the time with the assistance of foreign interests that have everything to lose if Ghana were self-sufficient in food production. Factories that had been built to preserve agricultural produce have been neglected and abandoned while millions of dollars are spent importing canned foods from other countries.
According to an International Food Policy Research Institute report; “Problems such as corruption, collusion and nepotism can significantly inhibit the capacity of governments to promote development efforts.” Ghana’s case falls within this category where more than US$400 million is currently spent annually for the importation of rice alone, when the crop could be cultivated in almost all the regions of the country. Incidentally, those whose responsibility it is to encourage local production have direct or indirect benefit to derive from the importation of the commodity as big-time importers or distributors. In the same way, the local poultry industry has suffered due to excessive importation of poultry products from Brazil and other countries.
Food aid, though they have short-term advantages have negative effects ultimately. First, free or cheap food aid dulls the determination of local farmers to produce their own. It also affects the market situation to the disadvantage of local production and stretches the dependency syndrome. Some of this food sometimes comes at a time recipient countries are enjoying bumper harvests and were actually designed to offload stored produce of farmers in foreign countries.
African countries, under pressure from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), have removed subsidies on agricultural inputs while unbridled trade liberalisation have opened the valves widely for foreign products to enter these countries to the detriment of local production which cannot compete evenly with these cheaper and yet sometimes of questionable quality imports. The construction of the silos abandoned after the overthrow of the Nkrumah regime had never been resuscitated and thereby giving room for food to go waste.
While food production has lagged behind consumption levels, population control had not been so effective. Sub-Saharan Africa’s population, according to the United Nations Population Fund (UNPF), has grown faster than any other region over the past 30 years. It said between 1975 and 2005, the region’s population more than doubled from 335 million to 751 million.
An attempt is being made to link global food shortages to the production of biogas in commercial quantities. The reason why this cannot offer any tangible for Africa’s food problems is that no African country is yet in any major biogas production. Secondly, the continent has enough fertile land to feed itself if only those in political leadership can put their acts together and tap the vast resources at their disposal to produce enough to feed their population, enough to go into bio-fuel production and even export onto international markets.
This means African countries must invest more in agricultural production. Exhortations to farmers should be beefed up with concrete support in the form of credit facilities, availability of inputs such as tools and agro-chemicals and good road network to facilitate the transport of farm produce to marketing centres.
Food storage and preservation should be taken seriously. There is too much wastage at the moment and the more bumper harvests are stored and preserved, the less the danger of food shortages.
More intra-regional trade should be encouraged. The situation where while one country is experiencing a bumper harvest another is suffering from drought and food shortage should be exploited to the mutual benefit of all parties.
The greatest weapon to fight hunger is good governance. Most African leaders lack the courage to embark on ambitious agricultural programmes. There are too many contradictions in the system which must be addressed. There is no use declaring support for local production when those who control political power are themselves importers or are in alliance with food importers.
There is no need to celebrate independence when a country which has the capacity lacks the ability to feed itself. This is a challenge to African leaders.
ON April 12, 1980, Master-Sergeant Samuel Kanyon Doe, then 39 years, shot himself into the Executive Mansion, Monrovia, the capital of Liberia. The then President William R. Tolbert Jnr. and his entire cabinet were slaughtered to herald what became one of Africa’s bloodiest military coups. Even though there were several underlying factors, what delivered the coup-de-grace was what was referred to as the Rice Riots of 1979. That was the year there were serious food shortages in Liberia and rice, the staple of Liberians, became scarce. You may not believe it, but inadequate rice supply brought a person like Doe to power in Liberia and subsequently created other characters like Charles Taylor and the rest in history
In 1991, Frederick Chiluba, a former bus conductor and trade unionist led a party to sweep Kenneth Kaunda out of office through a landslide victory, thanks to a serious economic downslide including an acute shortage of maize which constitute the basic food of most Zambians.
This year, the writing is clear on the wall – the world is going to suffer serious shortages, if the food-related riots in Haiti, Cote d’Ivoire, Egypt, the Philippines and Indonesia are anything to go by. Apart from the global situation, the World Food Programme (WFP) has predicted that 27 sub-Saharan countries need help in respect of food shortages.
The President of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, has raised the alarm bells already, with the declaration that about 100 million people in poor countries, mostly in Africa, could be pushed deeper into poverty by spiraling prices. The World Bank, in response to this threatening calamity, has announced some emergency measures including the doubling of loans to African farmers.
The President of the United States of America, George W. Bush, has also ordered the release of US$200 million in emergency aid to alleviate food shortages in Africa and other parts of the world.
Apart from these temporary relieves, what is Africa doing about the food situation, in view of the fact that the continent has lived with food shortages over the years? Africa has battled food shortages and famine for several reasons. These could be either natural or what could be described as self-inflicted... Excessive wars, military strife and military coups have had their toll on food production in many parts of the continent.
Countries such as Liberia, Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Eritrea, Rwanda, Ethiopia and Cote d’Ivoire which have experienced civil wars and social conflicts have traditionally experienced food shortages of varied degrees.
Climatic conditions such as drought and floods and pestilences have also affected food production in many countries, especially of those in the Sahelian region and East Africa.
Notwithstanding these natural factors, Africa’s problems which include inadequate food production have been largely the combination of irresponsible political leadership, which has long term effect on food security, under investment in rural economies where agricultural activities take place and unfair international trade barriers which frustrate local farmers.
While many African governments make a lot of noise about increasing agricultural output, the situation on the ground suggests differently. Many food growing areas are not accessible to the marketing centres. This coupled with inadequate storage and preservation facilities means even the little that is produced go waste and never reach the consumers.
In Ghana, the construction of silos which were initiated during the Nkrumah era were never completed because of the political twist given to the enterprise by those in opposition at the time with the assistance of foreign interests that have everything to lose if Ghana were self-sufficient in food production. Factories that had been built to preserve agricultural produce have been neglected and abandoned while millions of dollars are spent importing canned foods from other countries.
According to an International Food Policy Research Institute report; “Problems such as corruption, collusion and nepotism can significantly inhibit the capacity of governments to promote development efforts.” Ghana’s case falls within this category where more than US$400 million is currently spent annually for the importation of rice alone, when the crop could be cultivated in almost all the regions of the country. Incidentally, those whose responsibility it is to encourage local production have direct or indirect benefit to derive from the importation of the commodity as big-time importers or distributors. In the same way, the local poultry industry has suffered due to excessive importation of poultry products from Brazil and other countries.
Food aid, though they have short-term advantages have negative effects ultimately. First, free or cheap food aid dulls the determination of local farmers to produce their own. It also affects the market situation to the disadvantage of local production and stretches the dependency syndrome. Some of this food sometimes comes at a time recipient countries are enjoying bumper harvests and were actually designed to offload stored produce of farmers in foreign countries.
African countries, under pressure from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), have removed subsidies on agricultural inputs while unbridled trade liberalisation have opened the valves widely for foreign products to enter these countries to the detriment of local production which cannot compete evenly with these cheaper and yet sometimes of questionable quality imports. The construction of the silos abandoned after the overthrow of the Nkrumah regime had never been resuscitated and thereby giving room for food to go waste.
While food production has lagged behind consumption levels, population control had not been so effective. Sub-Saharan Africa’s population, according to the United Nations Population Fund (UNPF), has grown faster than any other region over the past 30 years. It said between 1975 and 2005, the region’s population more than doubled from 335 million to 751 million.
An attempt is being made to link global food shortages to the production of biogas in commercial quantities. The reason why this cannot offer any tangible for Africa’s food problems is that no African country is yet in any major biogas production. Secondly, the continent has enough fertile land to feed itself if only those in political leadership can put their acts together and tap the vast resources at their disposal to produce enough to feed their population, enough to go into bio-fuel production and even export onto international markets.
This means African countries must invest more in agricultural production. Exhortations to farmers should be beefed up with concrete support in the form of credit facilities, availability of inputs such as tools and agro-chemicals and good road network to facilitate the transport of farm produce to marketing centres.
Food storage and preservation should be taken seriously. There is too much wastage at the moment and the more bumper harvests are stored and preserved, the less the danger of food shortages.
More intra-regional trade should be encouraged. The situation where while one country is experiencing a bumper harvest another is suffering from drought and food shortage should be exploited to the mutual benefit of all parties.
The greatest weapon to fight hunger is good governance. Most African leaders lack the courage to embark on ambitious agricultural programmes. There are too many contradictions in the system which must be addressed. There is no use declaring support for local production when those who control political power are themselves importers or are in alliance with food importers.
There is no need to celebrate independence when a country which has the capacity lacks the ability to feed itself. This is a challenge to African leaders.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Diluting the Olympic spirit with politics
By Kofi Akordor
THE Olympic Games, like other similar sports tournaments, are mainly meant to bring together athletes of various nationalities and different cultural backgrounds for the ultimate objective of attaining international peace and solidarity.
According to the Olympic Charter established by Pierre de Coubertin, who can be described as the Father of the Modern Olympics, the games are “to contribute to the building of a peaceful and better world by educating the youth through sports practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play”.
The games also bridged ideological gaps, brought together both the rich and poor, the powerful and the ordinary and strengthened the bonds of friendship among all and consequently reduce unnecessary tension in the world.
That was the case until 1980 when the United States of America (USA) decided to extend the Cold War battleground to the sporting arena. In that year, the USA led a boycott of the Moscow Olympic Games, citing, among other things, the invasion of Afghanistan by the then Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) as an excuse. Incidentally, that was the first time a Warsaw Pact country was hosting the summer Olympics.
Time, they say, changes. Today, it is the USA which has invaded Afghanistan in its war efforts against terror.
The USA succeeded in persuading poor and vulnerable Third World countries like Ghana, then under President Hilla Limann, to boycott the Moscow Games in return for aid packages which included consignments of wheat and yellow maize. The official explanation for the boycott was that the country could not afford the cost of going to Moscow. But it was common knowledge that that was not true and that the boycott decision had to do more with our inability to chart an independent path in international politics.
It, therefore, did not come as a surprise when, in 1984, the then USSR led a boycott of the Los Angeles Summer Olympic Games in retaliation. The USA, determined to beat the boycott, offered to airlift all participating countries from Africa and other poor regions of the world free of charge to the games. With such a generous offer, Ghana had no excuse, if even it had any intention to join its socialist counterparts in the boycott, and had to be there.
Earlier in 1976, African countries had, in solidarity with South Africa, which was then under apartheid rule, boycotted the Montreal Olympic Games in Canada because of the participation of countries with sporting ties with apartheid South Africa.
The 1980 Moscow and 1984 Los Angeles games were the last to be hosted by the superpowers before the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Empire. Since then, the games have been held in Barcelona (1992), Atlanta (1996), Sydney (2000) and Athens (2004) without any political disruptions.
On August 29, 2004, the Olympic flag was lowered in Athens and handed to the China Olympic Committee, which announced that the youth of the world would gather in Beijing in 2008 for the next Olympics. China, the world’s emerging economic power, plunged into serious action in preparation for the games which take place in August this year.
While everything seems to be going on well, there have been minor skirmishes to paint a gloomy picture of the Beijing Games. These include complaints about Beijing’s heavy traffic and atmospheric pollution. But these are issues that have been brushed aside as being too minor to affect the hosting of the games. However, two weeks ago, things took a different turn when demonstrators protesting against Chinese rule in Tibet clashed with the police, leaving an estimated 150 people dead.
Tibet has always been a sore point in China’s international diplomacy and the recent clashes have given ground for some of China’s opponents in the West to clamour for a boycott of the Beijing Summer Olympic Games.
Incidentally, this time the boycott voices are very feeble and among the major powers, only the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, has come out to openly declare that boycott is not out of the question.
The Australian Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, whose country has always pushed for a boycott of Zimbabwe for Mugabe’s alleged human rights abuses, said a boycott of the Beijing Olympics was not a sensible thing to do.
“The Olympics are a chance not only to put the spotlight on China but also enhance its engagement with the international community,” he said, admitting that, “In the past, boycotts of the Olympics, in my view, have not been successful, whether Australia is engaged in that, as it did with the Moscow Olympics, or when other nation states have engaged in it.”
This position was shared by other statesmen, including the Singaporean Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Vivian Balakrishnan, who said, “The games will provide a golden opportunity for athletes from all over the world to compete on a friendly basis, interact with one another, carry out fruitful dialogue and build lasting relationships.”
“If there are some people who want to boycott the Beijing Olympics, just leave them alone. We can still enjoy our great party,” Majed Al Qatarneh, the Secretary-General of the Jordan Olympic Committee, said.
To those who want to use politics to disrupt social events such as the Olympic Games, Patrick Hickey, the President of the European Olympic Committees (EOC), had this to say to them, “The EOC is a sports organisation which does not interfere in political issues.” Another EOC member, Togay Bayatli, observed, “Political issues should be resolved by the United Nations and other international organisations.”
The British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, while visiting China, also raised his opposition to calls for a boycott of the Beijing Games and called for all countries to participate.
“Political issues are unjust issues in the Olympic year. They should be issues we talk about every year,” he said, and raised the hopes of the anti-boycott lobby when he declared, “The Olympics should be a symbol of bringing countries and peoples together in an open, competitive way.”
Even though the Democrats in the US are pushing for a boycott of the games, President George W. Bush who, for once, is not prepared to swim against the tide of global opinion, has kept his distance from the Democrats.
Even the Dalai Lama and his government in exile have declared that they would want the Beijing Games to go on.
So who are those who stand to benefit from a boycott? As the Australian Foreign Minister noted, boycotts in the past had not been successful and there was no guarantee that any boycott this time would be different.
“It is the athletes who lose out in cases of boycotts and other political action,” the EOC’s Bayatli noted. I think that should inform those who are agitating for a boycott.
Africa, whatever the case may be, should not allow itself to be used as a pawn in any superpower ideological game again.
THE Olympic Games, like other similar sports tournaments, are mainly meant to bring together athletes of various nationalities and different cultural backgrounds for the ultimate objective of attaining international peace and solidarity.
According to the Olympic Charter established by Pierre de Coubertin, who can be described as the Father of the Modern Olympics, the games are “to contribute to the building of a peaceful and better world by educating the youth through sports practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play”.
The games also bridged ideological gaps, brought together both the rich and poor, the powerful and the ordinary and strengthened the bonds of friendship among all and consequently reduce unnecessary tension in the world.
That was the case until 1980 when the United States of America (USA) decided to extend the Cold War battleground to the sporting arena. In that year, the USA led a boycott of the Moscow Olympic Games, citing, among other things, the invasion of Afghanistan by the then Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) as an excuse. Incidentally, that was the first time a Warsaw Pact country was hosting the summer Olympics.
Time, they say, changes. Today, it is the USA which has invaded Afghanistan in its war efforts against terror.
The USA succeeded in persuading poor and vulnerable Third World countries like Ghana, then under President Hilla Limann, to boycott the Moscow Games in return for aid packages which included consignments of wheat and yellow maize. The official explanation for the boycott was that the country could not afford the cost of going to Moscow. But it was common knowledge that that was not true and that the boycott decision had to do more with our inability to chart an independent path in international politics.
It, therefore, did not come as a surprise when, in 1984, the then USSR led a boycott of the Los Angeles Summer Olympic Games in retaliation. The USA, determined to beat the boycott, offered to airlift all participating countries from Africa and other poor regions of the world free of charge to the games. With such a generous offer, Ghana had no excuse, if even it had any intention to join its socialist counterparts in the boycott, and had to be there.
Earlier in 1976, African countries had, in solidarity with South Africa, which was then under apartheid rule, boycotted the Montreal Olympic Games in Canada because of the participation of countries with sporting ties with apartheid South Africa.
The 1980 Moscow and 1984 Los Angeles games were the last to be hosted by the superpowers before the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Empire. Since then, the games have been held in Barcelona (1992), Atlanta (1996), Sydney (2000) and Athens (2004) without any political disruptions.
On August 29, 2004, the Olympic flag was lowered in Athens and handed to the China Olympic Committee, which announced that the youth of the world would gather in Beijing in 2008 for the next Olympics. China, the world’s emerging economic power, plunged into serious action in preparation for the games which take place in August this year.
While everything seems to be going on well, there have been minor skirmishes to paint a gloomy picture of the Beijing Games. These include complaints about Beijing’s heavy traffic and atmospheric pollution. But these are issues that have been brushed aside as being too minor to affect the hosting of the games. However, two weeks ago, things took a different turn when demonstrators protesting against Chinese rule in Tibet clashed with the police, leaving an estimated 150 people dead.
Tibet has always been a sore point in China’s international diplomacy and the recent clashes have given ground for some of China’s opponents in the West to clamour for a boycott of the Beijing Summer Olympic Games.
Incidentally, this time the boycott voices are very feeble and among the major powers, only the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, has come out to openly declare that boycott is not out of the question.
The Australian Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, whose country has always pushed for a boycott of Zimbabwe for Mugabe’s alleged human rights abuses, said a boycott of the Beijing Olympics was not a sensible thing to do.
“The Olympics are a chance not only to put the spotlight on China but also enhance its engagement with the international community,” he said, admitting that, “In the past, boycotts of the Olympics, in my view, have not been successful, whether Australia is engaged in that, as it did with the Moscow Olympics, or when other nation states have engaged in it.”
This position was shared by other statesmen, including the Singaporean Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Vivian Balakrishnan, who said, “The games will provide a golden opportunity for athletes from all over the world to compete on a friendly basis, interact with one another, carry out fruitful dialogue and build lasting relationships.”
“If there are some people who want to boycott the Beijing Olympics, just leave them alone. We can still enjoy our great party,” Majed Al Qatarneh, the Secretary-General of the Jordan Olympic Committee, said.
To those who want to use politics to disrupt social events such as the Olympic Games, Patrick Hickey, the President of the European Olympic Committees (EOC), had this to say to them, “The EOC is a sports organisation which does not interfere in political issues.” Another EOC member, Togay Bayatli, observed, “Political issues should be resolved by the United Nations and other international organisations.”
The British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, while visiting China, also raised his opposition to calls for a boycott of the Beijing Games and called for all countries to participate.
“Political issues are unjust issues in the Olympic year. They should be issues we talk about every year,” he said, and raised the hopes of the anti-boycott lobby when he declared, “The Olympics should be a symbol of bringing countries and peoples together in an open, competitive way.”
Even though the Democrats in the US are pushing for a boycott of the games, President George W. Bush who, for once, is not prepared to swim against the tide of global opinion, has kept his distance from the Democrats.
Even the Dalai Lama and his government in exile have declared that they would want the Beijing Games to go on.
So who are those who stand to benefit from a boycott? As the Australian Foreign Minister noted, boycotts in the past had not been successful and there was no guarantee that any boycott this time would be different.
“It is the athletes who lose out in cases of boycotts and other political action,” the EOC’s Bayatli noted. I think that should inform those who are agitating for a boycott.
Africa, whatever the case may be, should not allow itself to be used as a pawn in any superpower ideological game again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)