Africa: Painting a Façade of Democracy

While many parts of the world espouse open and unfettered democracies, where the people have the liberty to play an active part in shaping their destinies, Africa is forever riding a tide and roller coaster of vote manipulation and literary headed nowhere. Many countries in Africa are increasingly bringing scorn upon the continent whose politics are viewed as being far from open and independent. A case in point relates to questionable elections results in a number  of  African countries; namely Kenya, Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe. In these countries, elections were a sham and results contested largely because incumbent presidents were believed to have had manipulated votes to rob their opponent of deserved victory. These scenarios are all too common in Africa that it is a foregone conclusion that any presidential election is rigged even before the date. Like Zambia, Ivory Coast is also another African country that has become notorious for vote rigging where a losing incumbent has the audacity to declare himself as a winner.

One wonders why African leaders shamelessly see fit to engage in the despicable act of cheating at the polls. It is clear that "free and fair" does not feature in the minds of many a African leaders. As a matter of fact they are not bothered by lack of credibility. Take the case of Ivory Coast in which the country's Constitutional Council, led by Paul Yao N'Dre, invalidated earlier results by the Electoral Commission that named the former Prime Minister Alassane Ouattara, the winner. What makes incumbent African presidents have the insatiable desire to manipulate the votes? Is it by virtue of the understanding that the citizenry are impotent and cannot do anything? Do they fear that the law would catch up with them over their misdeeds while they were in office if they accepted defeat and stepped down? Do they fear what they only know they have done that the people don't know about? Why are African leaders devoid  of a sense of shame? Using underhanded methods to gain or stay in power is retrogressive to Africa's fragile democracies. At worst this repugnant behaviour will lead to more strife in Africa. What we call democracy in Africa is a mere façade inasmuch as the will of the people is contemptuously derided by selfish, greedy and power hungry politicians that choose to usurp power to perpetuate the rule.

Veteran Politician Sikota Wina weighs in on the Barotseland Agreement

One cannot blame some politicians that may may have a desire to take advantage of misguided sentiments arising from a few disgruntled elements that hail from Western Province. We all understand that politics is about seizing opportunities that irresponsible citizens present to constituencies. The majority of politicians enjoy taking advantage of such situations for purposes of not only achieving political mileage but also votes. One begins to wonder of what value the education of some of our colleagues in the Diaspora that are championing this senseless notion of Western Province's secession from Zambia.

The people agitating for secession of Western Province are just knuckleheads and selfish imps. The Zambian constitution provides for every citizen regardless of tribe,origin, creed and religious orientation to express their views freely and aspire for the highest office in the land without let or hindrance. However, some of our fellow learned Zambians living in the comfort of the diaspora are unjustifiably working to foment terrorism in Zambia. Education becomes meaningless and irrelevant if such individuals cannot use their education to carefully study the Barotse Agreement to better apply the knowledge in a wise and beneficial manner for one and all. Selfishness has that ugly the tendency to blind people from reality. Also, it is imperative that these people, forthwith, stop pandering to violent interests.

Suffice to say that it is gratifying to have our Veteran Politician Sikota Wina step in to share his knowledge, understanding and historical perspective of the Barotseland Agreement. Many Zambians have taken time to study the Barotseland Agreement in the form it was at the time of signing in London on May 8, 1964. Former President Kaunda and Sir Mwanawina Lewanika III appended their signatures to the agreement. The Agreement states that "Whereas it was the wish of the Goovernment of Northern Rhodesia and that of Litunga of Barotseland, his council and the chiefs and people of Barotseland and Northern Rhodesia, should proceed to independence as one country and that its entire people should be one nation".  The Agreement was written in no ambiguous terms for any level-headed person to understand. We applaud Veteran Politician Sikota Wina for weighing in on the issue to render his understanding of the Agreement. He has stated that the Agreement makes continuous reference to Barotseland as a integral part of the Republic of Zambia.

It is our hope that disgruntled miscreants living in the United States and other parts of the dispora will not continue to use their selfishness interests to foment chaos for the peace loving Zambians of Western Province and the rest of Zambia. Failure to understand the whole context of the Barotseland Agreement can be a recipe for chaos. It is inexcusable and repugnant for a learned person to fail tunderstand and interpret a clearly formulated Agreement.

Growing Desire for Secession from Zambia

The tendency to want to breakaway from Zambia has been long coming and is not in the least surprising. The whole misguided notion that the British signed an agreement with Lewanika for the country to attain independence from Britain is absurd inasmuch as the British did not own Zambia. Zambia belonged to Zambians and for one person to think that the colonialists had the right to give power to one selfish individual is ridiculous and stupid. It is totally insane for some individuals from Western province to continue to harbour those far-fetched notions that Britain gave them a right to, at a later stage, start advocating for a separate independent state. 


It must be clear from the outset that Zambia and Zambians existed long before the British came to colonize us. It can be seen that the driving motivation to the call for secession is the deep rooted tribal characteristic that we all too familiar with.  Some of the individuals advocating and writing for secession are living in America and maybe in the United Kingdom and is a cowardly act. The recent write-up was merely academic with the intent to incite those that do not think outside those tribal boxes. This adventure by our learned colleague is a very dangerous one. It is likely to turnout into a disaster which will negatively impact innocent Zambians living in Western province and other provinces of Zambia. 


We all know about the desire for these people to have a country in which only one language will be recognized and other non-language speakers shall be called makwerekwere. What sort of freedom of expression have this or these individuals been  denied in Zambia? Is it freedom to have a one-language nation? We are aware that the majority from the province do not share these late silly ideas and neither do they want to be manipulated by individuals who think they are fighting for their freedom when living comfortably in Europe and America. It is not their immediate family members who will be caught up in the cross-fire but ordinary Zambian citizens.


Many of us have wonderful, educated friends that hail from Western province and will be a sad reality if their counterparts continued to push for the unacceptable secession. This development will be a relationship and game changer at the same time. How then will we deal with our friends knowing that their own are advocating for violence and separation? Developments like this dictate that we all make conscious choices about how to deal with such unfortunate selfishness from a handful of people. The spectre of civil as advocated for by our learned friend will unnecessarily introduce elements of suspicion such that innocent Zambians from Western province will be viewed as potential troublemakers or terrorists and terrorists have to be dealt with a sledge hammer.


Secessionist must take this as a timely warning that Zambia will not entertain their ill-conceived idea and deal with the situation with kid gloves. If they want a country of their own, let them go to Britain and have the British give them a piece of the UK. Zambia is a unitary state and we will not allow selfishness to bring chaos to the nation.

Lynch the Chinese that Shot Zambians in Sinazongwe

Zambians are ever so hospitable toward foreigners irrespective of their race and origin. The hospitality almost amounts to insanity when one considers the manner in which they tend to prostrate themselves just to please a foreigner to make them feel good about them as a people. It is true that the Zambian hospitality is not a make-believe type, it's true, and it's real. Therefore, foreigners coming to Zambia for tourism and business must therefore learn to appreciate Zambia's hospitality and that nowhere on the continent of Africa are they accorded the kind of respect and hospitality as in Zambia by Zambians.

Events of last week that took place at a Chinese-Owned mine in Sinazongwe, in Southern Province of Zambia were utterly unfortunate and repugnant and must not be allowed to happen again. Those two Chinese Managers that shot twelve Zambians acted with impunity and in total disregard of the laws of the land. However, one is made to think that they took the law in their own hands because they probably understand and assume that the legal system in Zambia is broken down and a far-cry. If this was their assumption and premise, they may have also drawn from recent miscarriage and travesty of justice in Zambia when innocent Zambians were wrongly sentenced while the criminals escaped Scot-free on account of  interference from some quarters.

The shooting of innocent Zambians was not the first at Chinese run mines in the country. The first of such incidents happened in the recent past at a Chinese mine in Copperbelt and no one knows if Zambian authorities ever took legal action against the Chinese that fired shots. The action of the Chinese managers  may be attributed to the Zambian leadership tendency to support foreign investors regardless of their wrong-doing. Their investment in Zambia is a symbiotic one. Therefore, the Chinese investors must not use their investments to hold the nation and its people to ransom. Laws of the land governing employment matters, if any, must be respected and followed to the letter.

If the law in the country is spineless or totally ineffective and does not and will not serve the interest of Zambians, then Zambians must start to act in self-defense against foreigners such as the Chinese mine Managers who are repeatedly displaying their propensity to act as hooligans. One wonders how long the perceived peace-loving  Zambians will continue in this manner in the face of unwarranted aggression from the Chinese. Zambians who do not appear to have the leadership and the law on their side will have no choice but resort to taking the law in their own hands against Chinese hooliganism. Zambians can no longer continue acting nice against Chinese hooligans or any other investors who come to the country to reap from Zambia's natural wealth.

High Fuel Prices in Zambia

The media on Saturday, September 18, 2010 reported Zambia had evened out fuel prices to spark rural growth. The idea was to make fuel prices "uniform" across the country with the view to spur development in the remote parts of the country. The pronouncement generated interest and curiosity from various people as to how the statement would play out and translate into tangible investment projects. However, the impression created by the Energy Regulatory Board (ERB) that the price of fuel had been rendered uniform is in itself deceptive and a lie.

The purpose of this write-up is to show that people in Zambia pay fuel prices at the pump that are nothing but shameful and horrendously rip-off. For the purpose of illustrating this, the prices of fuel in Zambia will be compared with those obtaining in the US economy that largely relies on world market crude oil price. Against this backdrop, it will suffice to mention that the two countries use two different units of measuring liquids. In Zambia, like many African countries, a litre is used as the unit of measure for liquid merchandise while gallon is the unit of choice in the United States. Having said that and for the purpose of elucidating the relationship between the two units, one gallon is equivalent to 3.785 litres. However, the conversion may vary slightly depending upon the source of conversion factors one uses.
 

September 20, 2010 Fuel Prices at Akron, Pennsylvania (US)-
Picture Courtesy of Lusaka Gossip

In the US, as of September 13, 2010, gasoline (unleaded regular) prices in the East Coast to the West Coast ranged from US$2.536 per gallon to $3.026 per gallon. In terms of litres, the price of gasoline translates to US$0.67 per litre (or ZMK3,316.57 per litre) to US$0.80 per litre (ZMK3,957.38 per litre). Similarly, the price of diesel in the East Coast to the West Coast ranged from US$2.887 per gallon (ZMK3,775.60 per litre) to US$3.142 per gallon (ZMK4,109.09 per litre). Zambian consumers have recently been subjected to two unjustifiable fuel price increases within a short space of time. The upward adjustment have been relentless with due regard to the poverty level in the country. For instance, in January 2010, with the blind-blessing of the ERB, the price of fuel rose by 15 percent followed four months later by another increase in May by an almost comparable 13 percent.

With the new upward adjustment of the price of fuel, regular and diesel fuels are now costing ZMK7,639 per liter and ZMK6,999 respectively. In US dollar terms and on a one gallon basis, the Zambian consumer is now paying US$5.84 per gallon and US$5.35 per gallon for regular and diesel respectively. As you can see from the forgoing discussion, fuel consumers in Zambia are paying more than double the price paid by their counterparts in the United States. Tanking the above illustration into account, the price of unleaded regular should be costing ZMK4,000 and not a crazy price of ZMK7,639 per litre as the case is now. Similarly, the price of diesel should be much lower than the new exaggerated price.

Fuel pricing in Zambia casts a lot of doubt on the kind of economics employed and the competence of those responsible for determining fuel prices. Pricing in Zambia has always defied economic and mathematical logic and pricing trends in most industrial countries where the price of fuel at the pump is largely affected by dynamics of world crude oil prices and not mere price fixes as the case appears to be in Zambia. Although market forces are not perfect in themselves, one would still expect that prices of fuel to depend on the behaviour of world markets. Sadly and unfortunately, fuel pricing in Zambia seems lack economic sense to the extent that energy consumers remain perpetually subject to high prices that have no basis and justification and the mercy of the ERB. Even when the price of crude oil on the world market falls appreciably, the benefit is never passed on to the Zambian consumer. The ERB and other players turn a blind-eye oblivious of the fall in crude oil prices but extremely quick at increasing the fuel price as soon as crude oil edges a little higher.

In the light of the foregoing, it is bizarre to think that rural development can meaningfully be vitalized when the price of energy is prohibitive as illustrated above. Energy is a critical component in the stimulation of development and Zambia's rural development is not immune to it and cannot be achieved by deception but by real intervention strategies such as providing incentives to prospective companies seeking to set up industries or businesses that would ultimately add value to rural areas. What is needed to stimulate rural development is a realistic, purposeful well targeted policy and focused policy. Therefore, mere political statements intended to hoodwink the masses will not by themselves address the problem of lack of public interest to invest in rural areas.