Africa

A lack of economic diversification has long plagued much of Africa. During the colonial era and well beyond mono-crop agriculture did demonstrable harm to numerous societies. One of the destabilizing factors that fueled the conditions that created the Rwandan genocide, for example, was the collapse of coffee prices in a country dependent upon exporting coffee beans. Increasingly the mono-crop problem has been replaced with the so-called resource curse whereby countries discover oil, become dependent upon its export, warped by its allure, and disappointed by its false promises. The Brookings Institute has issued a report on Africa’s diversification challenge, which you can, and should, access here. 

The Atlantic Philanthropies has cast its gaze on South Africa, and particularly on the issues of land reform and protecting the country’s rural poor. From this page you can access the (pdf) Atlantic Report, “Lessons From A Communications Campaign For South Africa’s Rural Poor.”  

Want to start a debate among South Africans? Get several of them together and ask what positive developments are likely to spring from the country’s preparations to host the 2010 World Cup? Inevitably you’ll get someone passionately telling you that it is nothing more than an ill-fated jingoistic boondoggle  while someone else argues as ardently that the World Cup will propel South Africa into the first rank of nations, and you’ll hear all opinions between these two poles.

It does appear that preparations for the World Cup have forced South Africa to upgrade significantly an antiquated transportation infrastructure that, in the words of this Mail & Guardian story,  is “still plodding on routes designed by the apartheid regime to keep people apart.” According to Transport Minister Jeff Radebe,  “The development of our transport infrastructure will undoubtedly be one of the shining legacies of the World Cup.” It remains to be seen if the real outcome achieves the idealized one, but at least the desires of those involved in the planning represent a long-range vision for South Africa.

With the announcement that it plans to lay 2,300 kilometers of fiber-optic cable in the next year, Rwanda has taken the lead in communications technology in Central Africa. Nearly any discussion about Rwanda, whether positive or critical, takes place against the backdrop of the 1994 genocide and the context that created it. This decision marks a huge step forward for that country and will help transform the country’s economy while allowing it to become a regional telecommunications hub.

This news takes place against the backdrop of the seemingly perpetual chaos just across Rwanda’s border in eastern Congo.  Any positive developments in Rwanda occur against the backdrop of that vortex, into which Rwanda could be (and has been in past conflicts) easily subsumed. Thus Rwandans, though not Rwandans alone or even primarily, have to hope that a possible commitment of 3,000 more UN troops will stabilize the region long enough for negotiations and a political solution to emerge. Rwandans, Congolese, Ugandans, Burundians and others simply cannot afford a perpetual cycle of one-step-forward, two-steps-back. People with the least ground to lose cannot afford to lose more.

There is a reason why economics is known as the “dismal science.” For all of the accoutrements of precision and exactitude, the reality is that much of economics is at least as much alchemy as science, and the supposed “laws” of economics are more like guidelines than immutable realities.

It is thus not surprising that Thabo Mbeki and some of his critics have such wildly varying views of his economic policies. Mbeki defends his record by pointing out the consistent, steady rates of growth of the South African economy under his watch and argues that his policies have prevented some of the econolic calamities experienced elsewhere. His critics, the SACP and COSATU chief among them, believe that he is not doing enough to address poverty and accuse him of being delusional about the direction of the economy.

Both arguments have merit, but when it comes to economic policies, I tend not to buy into what the SACP wants to sell. Mbeki has not done enough to embrace anti-poverty programs, and the gap  between the haves and have nots, which continues to grow, is appalling. Nonetheless, the anti-liberalism pablum that the leftists on the Tri-Partite Alliance want to spew also leaves me cold. In an ideal world the government would continue on its course while expanding enough to embrace more ardent programs to address inequality, poverty, unemployment and the like.

Charles R. Stith, a former US ambassador to Tanzania and director of the African Presidential Archives and Research Center at Boston University, has an op-ed piece in today’s Boston Globe endorsing the Millennium Challenge Initiative as a way to help develop Africa. He argues that partisan squabbling over the amount of funding to provide the MCI is akin to an old proverb that asserts that when elephants fight it is the grass that suffers. It seems to me that it would be worth providing the full funding that President Bush wants if only to see if the program is viable.

A number of stories caught my attention this weekend. Here are a few of them, with brief commentary as appropriate:

The Makana Football Association, which operated surreptitiously on Robben Island among the political prisoners has achieved recognition from FIFA, the sport’s governing body. A feature film, More Than Just a Game, starring Tsotsi’s Presley Chweneyagae, is to be released in South Africa in the next few weeks.

Thabo Mbeki recently has been stepping up his advocacy of a trilateral free trade area between South Africa, India, and Brazil. Mbeki believes that this trade bloc will give these leading nations in the developing world a stronger hand in trades with the World Trade Organization and will focus on addressing poverty and underdevelopment in the three countries and within the regional spheres that they dominate.

The Mail & Guardian’s “ZA @ Play” has an interview with Mark Gevisser, the respected observer of South African politics whose forthcoming book Thabo Mbeki: The Dream Deferred is highly anticipated. The interview is fairly anodyne, truth be told, but the book should stand as a definitive early treatment of Thabo Mbeki’s life if it can avoid the pitfalls of polemicism and advocacy to which virtually all of the books on Mbeki up to now have succumbed. 

Finally, a bit of a controversy has enveloped one of my old stomping grounds, Rhodes University. Last year Anne Warmenhoven submitted a doctoral thesis to Rhodes’ psychology department, which approved the dissertation and granted Warmenhoven the PhD. Her topic is the late disgraced former Proteas captain Hansie Cronje. But the dissertation apparently is nowhere to be found, apparently because members of Cronje’s family only agreed to speak with Warmwnhoven under conditions of secrecy. Obviously this goes against every principle of academic freedom and openness, not to mention ideals of transparency that are supposed to be a hallmark of the New South Africa.

If’s a busy news cycle right now in Southern Africa. here are a number of stories that caught my eye in today’s chock-full Mail & Guardian and elsewhere:

As the thirteith anniversary of the murder of Steven Bantu Biko at the hands of the security forces approaches different South Africans remember Biko’s life and death differently.

the Zimbabwe crisis continues unabated. The economic calamity has opened the door for corruption. Some maintain hopes  that South African-brokered talked will lead to a resolution of the political elements of the country’s conflicts, but it seems that  this may not be the time for whistling past the graveyard.

Meanwhile, transformation isn’t always easy. Members of the Democratic Alliance (DA) are up in arms over the Tshwane metropolitan council’s reported ban on white businesses. If the allegations are accurate, the DA would certainly seem to have a case that they will bring before the Constitutional Court. Meanwhile in a  pronouncement that is likely to be equally tendentious, the Black Management Forum  (BMF)  has argued that white women should be removed from the list of groups previously disadvantaged ”in terms of . . . employment equity legislation.” It is a bit hard for white women who benefitted in every imaginable way from apartheid suddenly stepping forward to claim their lots alongside the black South Africans on whose backs the Apartheid system built white privilege.

Finally, the M&G’s longtime rugby columnist Andrew Capostagno has a nifty piece on how this Rugby World Cup represents a “big chance” for the Springboks. He concludes his historically astute article by arguing that if the Boks achieve their considerable promise and “Win this one” South Africans “can forget, for a long, glorious moment, about politics.”

According to the Mail & Guardian, SADC’s plan for Zimbabwe’s economic recovery is a non-starter because, well, SADC and its member nations do not have the necessary funds and the prospect of such support coming from the west in sufficient qualities is highly improbable.:

The economic rescue package for Zimbabwe, touted at the Southern African Development Community (SADC) summit in Lusaka last week, is a non-starter, economists and political commentators argued this week.

They said that at least $15-billion would be needed to restore Zimbabwe’s collapsing infrastructure and revive commercial agriculture, the mainstay of the formal economy. The region could not foot this bill and Western “development partners” would not come to the party unless Zimbabwe democratised and introduced rational economic policies.

There are two (possibly three) questions that SADC ought to be asking: Were the funds available, would the economic recovery plan be either desirable or viable? This is a crucial question because any Zimbabwe economic recovery plan that does not incorporate regime change seems to be placing a misshapen stopper in a spilling bottle. Doing so will be, at best, a temporary solution. The second question then takes two paths: If such a plan is viable or desirable, is accessing the funding truly an impossible task? If not, then what plan must SADC develop in its place?

But of late it seems that SADC is uninterested in asking what ought to be baseline questions for fear of not finding their preferred answers. Until the member nations of SADC take the questions seriously, there is little reason why we should seriously consider their answers.

From a Medical Research Council report on children’s health issues in South Africa:

Every year almost 23,000 South African babies die in their first month of life, yet one in five of these deaths could be avoided with better education, and relatively inexpensive and easily implemented changes in healthcare, says a new study by the Medical Research Council (MRC).

“The bad news is that, according to the report, ‘one in five deaths could have been clearly avoided’, and inequalities are also highlighted, with avoidable deaths being twice as common in rural areas,” said Joy Lawn, Senior Policy and Research Advisor at Saving Newborn Lives, a programme run by Save the Children, an international non-governmental organisation for children’s rights, in the foreword to the report.

“The good news is that these deaths are not complex or expensive to prevent - improving the quality of care during childbirth is a top priority that would also save mothers’ lives and reduce long-term disabilities in children,” Lawn commented. 

This latter news, of course, is what South Africans must work to bring to fruition. These issues are tied in with questions of opportunity and access that South Africa also struggles to address.