The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Kagame

  • Kagame and bogey of Africa-styled democracy

    Kagame and bogey of Africa-styled democracy

    • By Ayodele Okunfolami

    For the past 24 years, Rwandans have known no other president than Paul Kagame. He had been the de facto leader since 1994 when he served as vice president and Minister of Defence before kicking out President Pasteur Bizimungu. His authoritarian rule will continue for at least five years after winning another landslide election victory.

    Kagame had won 99.15% of the votes. That result itself is a red flag. It echoes the reality of Rwanda’s political landscape where elections are just pageantries where Kagame wins. He had won with 98.79% in 2017 and in similar percentages in previous elections.

    Because under Kagame, landlocked Rwanda has been experiencing guided, political stability, economic growth and declining poverty levels, the supposed dividends of democracy that is lacking in many African countries, there have been calls from different quarters for Africa to craft an indigenous democracy that suits its peculiarities.

    I have heard former President Olusegun Obasanjo in recent months call for Africa’s adoption of Western liberal democracies a mistake and so canvasses for a democratic model that encompasses the African culture and traditions. I disagree with this notion.

    Ironically, Nigeria under him embraced western economic prescriptions. Why align our economics, religion, medicine, sports, entertainment and other values, institutions and products after the West but disagree with their democracy?

    And what exactly are World Bank and IMF recommending for African economies that are unfavourable? What is detrimental in someone telling you to reduce your budget deficit? They are simply telling you to minimize your debts.

    Is anything wrong in redirecting subsidies from politically popular areas like petrol and pilgrimages to highly economic returns like agriculture and education? When they say you should devalue your naira, they are only telling you to patronize made-in-Nigeria goods. When they say you should privatise inefficient state-owned enterprises, is it not a way of raising needed capital, reducing cost and bureaucracy of governance for increased profitability?

    Moreover, you cannot blame the doctor or anti-malarials if you don’t have the discipline to take the drugs as prescribed, diet appropriately or clean up the mosquito-infested environment that caused the disease in the first place. Like the human body, economies are complex so that medicine that is good for the heart may be injurious to the kidney. So, while trying to lower inflation with higher interest rates, you should be careful not to discourage investment. Are these not the expansive macroeconomic policies that Obasanjo applied in his democratic administration that Nigeria witnessed some of its highest growth rates in history?

    So, if Africans are not seeing any benefit in western liberal democracy, the problem is not the system but the practitioners and the solution doesn’t lie in tweaking it to indulge our undisciplined elite or to shift grounds to accommodate a melancholic citizenry awaiting a benevolent dictator or accidental messiah.

    First, we should perish the idea that democracy is Western. It is not. It is universal. Like formal education cradled in the Middle East, which the Western world is leading today doesn’t make education western. Democracy was conceived in ancient Greece, spread into the Europe, and now propagated by America. Besides, democracy is both elastic and adaptive in nature in that it adjusts to the culture of the people it finds itself. Britain may be parliamentary, America presidential while France is a combination of both, there are variants across the globe; however the fundamentals of free speech, citizen participation, accountability, political tolerance, equality, multiparty participation, human rights, periodic free and fair elections are not compromised no matter the geography. And democracy has found a way to adapt itself to the people of Africa so looking for afro-democracy is fruitless. It exists. By gaining independence, we simply say we can govern ourselves our own way. The problem we have is the discipline to abide by the constitution we wrote by ourselves and for ourselves.

    Read Also: Reps member says poor communication keeps Tinubu’s achievements hidden from Nigerians

    Even if we call democracy western and choose to reject it, what alternatives are we proposing? Are we as well looking for alternatives to going cap in hand asking for aids from western donors or vaccines from them or is it only their democracy and economic remedies we are attempting to reinvent? Besides, democracy remains an experiment whose success depends on inputting the right parameters. Also, it is an abstract concept that even the most democratic of nations still aspire to attain.

    Unfortunately, the likes of Kagame are poor examples of what an African democracy should be, and I advise we should not be carried away but instead be more circumspect.

    At a watch party as results were announced, Kagame claimed it was the uniqueness of his political party, Rwanda Patriotic Front, and the Rwandan electorate. Really? How can a country that still bleeds from the infamous Tutsi-Hutu animosity that led to an unforgettable genocide consistently give its votes to someone on one divide without asking for a balance in power? As advanced as America is, their votes still reflect their racial, religious and gender differences and one fractious Rwanda will vote 99% for somebody? Give me a break!

    Elections that consistently see less than 1% of the electorate voting against you are nothing short of a sham. Even God Almighty had a third of heaven “vote” against Him when the devil rebelled. Mr Kagame, there is nothing unique about Rwanda, the elections that have being returning you have all been fraudulent. Period!

    An election which barred key opposition parties from participating for flimsy reasons of not garnering enough signatures is not democratic and this is where Africa keeps missing it. We are so starved of good governance that we approach democracy by how we elect our leaders, so we tamper with our individual constitutions like Rwanda and electoral processes without embodying the spirit of democracy. It is the other way round. Democracy is not about wanting young people willing to protest to listen to the president; it is about the president listening to the people. Democracy is the rule of the people not leaders constantly tweaking how we vote or changing who we vote for.

    Rwanda may be doing well economically relative to sub-Saharan countries but that is only the tip of the spear. Firstly, that is an exception, and no one builds a doctrine out of exceptions. Secondly, what we don’t see is that Rwanda is irredeemably indebted to the tune of 76% of its GDP so like its continental peers, she is at the mercy of the West whose liberal democracy they are frowning at. Hence, Rwanda sports-washes by hosting NBA matches for Africa and volunteers to accommodate illegal immigrants ejected from the UK. Kagame has learnt this art to turn away the eyes of the media from all the human right abuses. And since one cannot separate the economy from the ideology of the government, it is just a matter of time before the bubble bursts on Rwanda.

    Weeks before, Ruto was the toast of the West; today, he is isolated like a COVID patient struggling to breathe life into his presidency.

    Rwandans should not be envied; they should be pitied. The likes of Kagame are littered around the continent. Kagame seems to have started well like others, he would soon become like his mentor from the trenches, Yoweri Museveni, who is now an irritant to the Ugandans he has been ruling since 1986. That is the democracy Africa is showcasing to the world. The democracy of Paul Biya, Teodoro Obiang and other museum pieces that gunned their way into power and have placed their boots on their citizens’ necks. That is African-styled democracy. We have already experienced it, and we can say it is flawed.

    If Africans look inwards, we will find out democracy is not alien. Our traditional kings, whom we regard as deities, have councils of elders to whom they take counsel. It is not different from the executive-legislature democracy that we have imbibed. Our problem is both the thrones and the councils have chosen to be unaccountable to the people they are supposed to serve. But as Barack Obama once told Christiane Amanpour, “Democracy will win if we fight for it. It is not self-executing. It depends on the engagement of citizens and active mobilization of the people in the belief of self-governance, rule of law, independent judiciary, free press.”

    No country gets democracy right. What makes nations admirable is that they deliberately and consistently strengthen the various arms of government, opposition parties, impeachments, recalls, media, civil societies, trade unions, protests and other democratic instruments. For the optimum use of our cars, we follow the makers’ manual. Similarly, for us to make the most of democracy, it is the application of more democracy, not less of it or surrendering to an adulterated form.

    •Okunfolami writes from Festac, Lagos.

  • Rwandan Kagame and the foibles of African democracy

    Rwandan Kagame and the foibles of African democracy

    Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame has won a record fourth term election with an alleged 99% of the votes of the nine million registered voters in his country. He does seem to get progressively more votes since the year 2003 when he won with 95%, in 2010, he won with 93% and won with 98% in 2017.  Even though there seems to be an opaque account of the voting statistics, he has won the election and is ready to lead the country for another term.

    However, global political analysts and the opposition parties claim that what they have in Rwanda is a pseudo democracy where there seems to be no viable opposition. Democracy as practiced in other more established jurisdictions means more than elections and lone victories. It is about healthy and competitive democratic process that gives every candidate the freedom to vote and be voted for.

    President Kagame is a child of circumstance having grown up in exile in Uganda after the parents fled with him to a Ugandan refugee camp when he was barely out of diapers at the age of two. The historical issues that pushed him into rebellion in exile are well documented. He had served earlier as Vice president and defense Minister but has led since 2000.

    As leader of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), he had set forth on a reunification journey after the 1994 genocidal war that claimed about 800,000 lives of Rwandans of both the Hutu and Tutsi tribes. His government had made efforts for unification by insisting that all Rwandans identify as Rwandans rather than the divisive ethnically charged ethnic tags.

    Truth be told, the President has largely been successful in reuniting the people, improving gender inclusiveness and eschewing the divisiveness that has claimed lives along ethnic lines. The Rwanda economy has attracted admiration globally. It is relatively stableand the people united. The functionality of their system is admired across the world. Education, healthcare, housing and other socially relevant amenities are provided for all the people. The hospitality industry is growing and Rwanda seems to be attracting more foreign direct investments than most other countries in Africa given a system that seems well monitored, barely corrupt and with improved ease of doing business. Technology is thriving and young entrepreneurs and intellectuals in the diaspora all feel free to return to their country to help rebuild the nation.

    While many criticize his stranglehold on a freer democratic space, given that he is alleged to have muscled down opposition and ruled with an iron hand, many applaud his efforts at building a united Rwanda where young people are given a chance to bring their industry to nation-building. The average age of his cabinet is said to be 40 years. Women make up 50% of his cabinet, Rwanda has the global highest number of women in parliament at 61.5%, women make up 50% of Supreme Court judges. Many credit his relative success to the gender inclusive policies he has maintained.

    His popularity is not in doubt in his country but while the economic and social sides are progressing, there is mixed feelings about his understanding of democracy and its credentials. He quickly counters that the circumstances of a Rwanda post genocide is like no other system and must carve out its own strategies for success and development. Many argue that he must not violate the tenets of democracy hiding under the special circumstances in his nation.

    The beauty of democracy is freedom, justice and social inclusion. These issues call for strict adherence to the tenets of democracy. The freedom of choice is at the root of democracy and as such, the idea that there are allegations of the repression of opposition cuts at the heart of the concerns of his critics. Opposition in and out of the country alleges that there have been no a level playing field since he came to power. Multiple tenures that he is alleged to have usurped at the expense of the opposition seems a signature of most African leaders past and present.

    To have had merely two weak opposition parties like the Democratic Green Party and the Independent Phillipe Mpayimana who all together could not even muster 1% of the votes in the recent election appears comical. The very vocal opposition female candidate, Diane Rwigara was barred from taking part in the elections despite all her efforts to be given a chance. She had told the media that the allegations that her paper works were incomplete were spurious.  There are other allegations of some opposition members being hounded out of the country.

    What is democracy without freedom, without viable opposition, no true freedom of speech or transparent justice system? A Prof. Reyntjens claims that; “The problem in Rwanda is with political governance, there is no level playing-field, there is no space for opposition, there is no freedom of speech, [which] risks undoing the achievements of good technocratic governance. Although Rwanda fell short of its middle-income country target by 2020, Prof Reyntjens says “this is a well-run country”.

    The Roundtable Conversation spoke to Dr Sam Amadi, a lawyer and the Executive Director of Center  for Public Policy & Research on his views about President Kagame an his brand of democracy. He said that democracy is more robust and multi-dimensional than the Rwandan experience presents.  Democracy presupposes the availability of choice and freedom. Free and fair elections are vital in validating electoral victory he insists.

    In his view, President Kagame has tried in creating economic freedoms, social cohesion but the lack of democratic rights of every single citizen seems to stain the banner of the Rwandan democratic experience.  He believes that authoritarian rule in no way equates economic freedom. He cited the Chinese model where there is economic freedom but we all understand the political system there.

    In Rwanda, Kagame may be popular given his role in reuniting the people but his democratic credentials do not necessarily align with the functional democratic precepts across the developed democracies. He has managed to lay a good foundation for a national re-orientation and value that has built confidence and trust in the people. The social psychology of the people might be better than a palce like Nigeria because there is no ethnic discrimination but the election process must be better.

    The important thing in every democracy is the freedom that the people enjoy. He believes that there are three fundamentals for a viable democracy, the freedom to choose the leaders, the ability of people to organize their events and the state must protect fundamental economic and political freedoms of the people. The human development dimensions are not one sided. The Rwandese people might have other freedoms or other high levels of satisfactions with social developments but democracy must be in a free space.

    He believes that the President can develop the economy but he must optimize plans for its sustenance. He recalled the disintegration of USSR in the past where the leaders were able to mobilize resources for development but could not sustain the country. The Rwandan people might be enjoying some attachment to their country because of the existing national re-orientation and national pride given the recent history but they must have functional democracy.

    The human development dimensions in Rwanda is possibly very high because there are some basic social freedoms that might not exist in other jurisdictions but that does not necessarily imply that the brand of democracy of a Kagame is sustainable in the long run. He hopes to see a Rwanda where the core democratic principles in all its many facets can thrive. The freedom to exercise basic human rights is important for the sustenance of democracy.

    There is economic development but no democracy in the real sense. Elections must be seen to be free, fair, inclusive  and credible. The Rwandan experience must be credited for their embrace of national unity more than Nigeria for instance but it does not define democracy. Other dimensions of human development must go beyond economic development. Rwanda is high on rule of law, there is no overt discrimination and the economy is stable but the totality of this can be replaced with a pseudo democracy. There must be competitive elections that would be seen to lay the groundswell for sustainable democracy.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Paul Kagame secures 99% votes, wins fourth term as Rwanda president

    The Roundtable Conversation is concerned that the African model of democracy where some leaders tend to sit tight cannot develop the continent. It is intriguing to hear President Kagame attempt to justify his long hold on power by telling the West to mind their business because the African story is not their story. The interesting thing is that democracy as he seems to benefit from has rules so it would appear like speaking from both sides of the mouth to pretend to practice democracy when it is expedient and try to carve out a Rwandan model where he is almost monarchical.

    The young Africans in the Rwandan cabinet must be shown the values of freedom of choice through practice. We understand the journey of the Rwandan people but there must be no messianic syndrome as we had seen in some other countries.  The growth and development process of any country is often dependent of leadership.  The President might have done well in social and economic terms but without true political freedom for everyone, the future might not be as progressive as one might assume.

    Rwanda is proudly known as the nation of a thousand hills, this implies that they are on a pedestal if not for the East and Central African nations, then for the rest of Africa. They must then be like the biblical light on the hill top that other countries might just see as a beacon.  We propose that President Kagame begin the process of dismantling messianic complex that is pushing him into assuming that he is the only one that loves Rwanda enough to take it to the axiomatic Promised Land. Democracy thrives on basic freedoms and he can bring the verve he brought to unifying the country to enthroning real competitive elections.  

  • Kagame, Disu urge alliance for Africa’s digitalisation

    Globacom’s Executive Vice Chairman Mrs Bella Disu and Rwandan President Paul Kagame have said the digitalisation of Africa is the solution to the continent’s regional integration and economic growth.

    They spoke during a meeting held on the sideline of the 2019 edition of Africa CEO Forum, which kicked off in Kigali, Rwanda yesterday.

    They agreed that the deployment of digital technology will help to fast track the continent’s march towards economic prosperity, and that Globacom, the digital solution provider, would be of immense support in driving the digitalisation of the continent, especially through the Glo 1 international submarine cable.

    Kagame also commended the success Globacom has made over the years.

    The Glo EVC on her part, said the carrier could help Africa achieve a digitalised economy through its international submarine cable, Glo 1, as well as digital solutions such as mobile money, artificial intelligence (AI), e-health, smart cognitive learning and smart energy.

    “I commend President Kagame for his exemplary leadership and for the tremendous success Rwanda has achieved under him. Like President Kagame, I have no doubt that greater integration will lead to continental growth and a more prosperous Africa. Globacom is committed to Africa’s economic renaissance,” Mrs Disu said.

    President Kagame had while declaring the forum opne, called for “open, responsive and accountable governance” on the continent. He said the private sector was critical to growth because of its ability to “envision on what needs to be changed to achieve desired improvement in the private and public sectors”.

    Speaking later when she chaired a session on: Women in Business on the opening day of the forum, Mrs Disu applauded Rwanda’s policy of 50 per cent female representation in appointments as a good model. She also called for more gender parity on the boards of companies.

    “There are no two ways about it, women must continue to advance. After all, we make up more than half of the world’s population. My charge to women is to keep climbing the career ladder. Climb it anxious. Climb it confidently. But just keep climbing. And when you get to the top, because you will – give a helping hand to the women coming behind you – this is how we grow,” she said.

    Dignitaries at the opening session of the Forum included Togolese President, Faure Gnassingbé,  Ethiopian President, Sahle-Work Zewde; Cote d’Ivoire’s Prime Minister, Amadou Gon Coulibaly; Prime Minister of Rwanda, Édouard Ngirente, President of Congo Democratic Republic, Felix Tshisekedi.

    It was also attended by over 1,800 leading decision makers in the private and public sectors from different parts of Africa and beyond.

     

  • Kagame, Elumelu to lead young entrepreneurship day

    Kagame, Elumelu to lead young entrepreneurship day

    The Rwandan President and Chairman of Smart Africa, Paul Kagame and founder of the $100m Entrepreneurship Programme Mr. Tony Elumelu will be lead speakers at the Young Entrepreneurship Day (YED) at the Africa 2017 Forum.

    The Young Entrepreneurship Day will bring together some of Africa’s most-promising entrepreneurs and investors/new partners to help them scale up their ideas and businesses. The most-successful start-ups will gain access to a deal room and a week tailored course at Stanford, United Kingdom.

    The YED is a new addition to the Forum and will take place on the eve of Africa 2017, on  December 7. It has been designed to connect some of Africa’s most promising entrepreneurs and give them exposure to investors, incubators and accelerators as well as partake in workshops that will give them the skills and tools to scale up their businesses.

    Both Elumelu and Kagame have been championing entrepreneurship and will be sharing their perspectives both from government and the private sector as well as engage in an open platform with some of the upcoming leaders from across Africa. Sitting on the advisory board of the YED are Issam Chleuh and Rebecca Enonchong, two of the foremost players in impact investing and in the technology space in Africa as well as Parminder Vir, Chief Executive Officer of Tony Elumelu Foundation. Other speakers at the YED include Ben White of VC4Africa and Wale Ayeni from IFC Ventures, the venture capital wing of the World Bank’s private sector arm.

    Commenting on the YED, Minister of Investment and International Cooperation, Dr. Sahar Nasr, whose ministry is organising the Africa 2017 programme with COMESA Regional Investment Agency, said creating a pro-business environment for entrepreneurs to thrive is at the centre of her government’s policies. “Egypt has been at the forefront of making entrepreneurship work. With a bustling population of 90 million, 50 per cent of which are below the age of 30 and tech savvy, Egypt is rightly staking a claim as one of the fastest growing entrepreneurial hubs in the world,” Nasr said.Africa 2017 has been earmarked as the biggest Business to Business (B2B) and B2G gathering to take place in Africa this year. A number of heads of state have confirmed their attendance and there are 30 African investment promotion agencies and government delegations scheduled to attend. Alongside President Al Sisi of Egypt and President Kagame of Rwanda, Côte d’Ivoire President, Alassane Outtara will be in attendance as well as President of Comoros, Azali Assoumani and the Prime Minister of Mozambique Carlos Agostinho do Rosário. Some of Africa’s biggest names from business will also be attending Africa 2017, with the aim to accelerate cross-border investments and partnerships.

    The Forum will also be a platform for Egypt to showcase some of the mega projects that are underway and the opportunities linked to these in agribusiness, logistics, mining, energy construction, real estate and tourism. 

  • Jonathan in the eyes of Kagame, Mugabe, Museveni

    Jonathan in the eyes of Kagame, Mugabe, Museveni

    It is rare for African leaders to turn on themselves, except perhaps over border disputes and maybe ideological disagreements. It is rarer still for more than one African leader to come together to take a fellow leader to the cleaners. But when the number of attackers rises to three in the space of a few months, the victim of their merciless putdowns must feel dejected, assuming he has the capacity to appreciate insult. If there is proof President Goodluck Jonathan recognises the burden to his presidency of the disfavour he has fallen into in the estimation of many of his fellow African leaders, and the image crisis their very frank verbal putdowns has caused him, he has not shown it. Alas, in less than three months, Dr Jonathan has been brutally excoriated by no less than three African leaders, to wit, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, and Paul Kagame of Rwanda.

    Contributing to a panel discussion on “Solving conflicts and peace building in Africa” organized by the African Development Bank (ADB) during its recent annual meeting in Kigali, Rwanda, Mr Kagame came down hard on West African leaders who travelled to Paris to discuss perspectives on Boko Haram as a regional terror menace. It was clear the Nigerian leader was his real target. Said he: “I think we must take responsibility and accept our failures in dealing with these matters…When I am watching television and I find that our leaders, who should have been working together all along to address these problems that only affect their countries, wait until they are invited to go to Europe to sit there and find solutions to their problems…it’s as if they are made to sit down and address their problems…Why does anybody wait for that?…In fact, the image it gives is that we are not there to address these problems…they are (African leaders) happy to sit in Paris with the President of France and just talk about their problems…It doesn’t make sense that our leaders cannot get themselves together to address problems affecting our people…African leaders, we don’t need to be invited anywhere to go and address our problems, without first inviting ourselves to come together to tell each other the actual truth we must tell each other.”

    Mr Kagame’s sarcasm must rank as one of the most elegant president-to-president broadsides ever. He was gentle on Nigeria; indeed, he was mindful of pushing the knife too deeply into the malleable backs of West African leaders. Nevertheless, he made the point very firmly that the leaders who gathered in Paris at the patrician behest of French President Francois Hollande to discuss the Boko Haram problem were vacuous. Nigeria has done its incredulous best to paint the Boko Haram nightmare as a West African problem, nay even a global (al-Qaeda) disease, but Mr Kagame wondered why neither Nigeria, which is buffeted by terrorists, nor West African leaders who were half-expectant the Nigerian disaster would come knocking at their doors, understood that their inability to provide leadership was more to blame for the morass than the resolve of the insurgents to subvert the sub-region.

    Mr Mugabe had earlier given Nigeria a good hiding. Like Mr Kagame, the Zimbabwean leader was chary of mentioning Dr Jonathan by name. But though he generalised, the target of his abusive remarks was undisputable. Speaking in the presence of his military chiefs at a luncheon given in his honour on his 90th birthday, the ageing leader delivered this rasping invective against Nigeria: “Are we now like Nigeria where you have to reach your pocket to get anything done? You see we used to go to Nigeria and every time we went there we had to carry extra cash in our pockets to corruptly pay for everything. You get into a plane in Nigeria and you sit there and the crew keeps dilly-dallying without taking off as they wait for you to pay them to fly the plane.” Dr Jonathan disputes the semantic certainty of what constitutes corruption and stealing, but there is no disputing the revolting image of Nigeria that he carries with him.

    Perhaps the most galling and injurious insult against Dr Jonathan came from Mr Museveni, himself an aficionado of leadership and a connoisseur of the rigour and mystique of power. Addressing a political event in Kampala, and eager to win the approval of his country’s electorate, the intemperate Ugandan leader offered this memorable lampoon directed mainly at Dr Jonathan: “I have never called the United Nations to guard your (Ugandans) security. Me, Yoweri Museveni, to say that I have failed to protect my people and I call in the UN….I would rather hang myself…We prioritised national security by developing a strong army; otherwise our Uganda would be like DRC, South Sudan, Somalia or Nigeria where militias have disappeared with school children. It would be a vote of no confidence in our country and citizens if we can’t guarantee our security. What kind of persons would we be? It would be a mistake for the government of Nigeria to negotiate with these people. The most important thing is to defeat them; then negotiations can come after that.”

    Mr Museveni of course exaggerates his distaste for Nigeria’s weakness and his approbation of Uganda’s capabilities, but he nonetheless conveys his exasperation with Nigeria’s leadership failures in unmistakable terms and telling language. Coming at a time of universal disapproval of Nigeria’s lack of decisiveness in the face of grave terrorist challenge, as well as Dr Jonathan’s languid response, the opinions of the three African leaders, not to say the overwhelming media disapprobation of Nigeria’s leadership elite, can hardly be faulted. The three leaders are themselves not unimpeachable. Mugabe has done more damage to Zimbabwe than Dr Jonathan has seemed capable of doing. In fact by refusing to lay a solid foundation for Zimbabwean democracy, Mr Mugabe appears to have set the stage for a very turbulent post-Mugabe era, perhaps far worse than Dr Jonathan’s lack of vision.

    On his own, Mr Museveni may have offered Uganda a fairly intellectual and effective leadership, but corruption, authoritarianism, extra-judicial killings, lack of true democracy and poor handling of the Lord’s Resistance Army revolt in the northern parts of the country do not give the impression he stands on a higher moral ground to lecture Nigeria. But neither Mr Museveni’s egregious shortcomings nor Mr Mugabe’s intransigence and political short-sightedness, nor yet the sometimes strong-arm tactics of Mr Kagame, vitiate the force and moral impact of their criticisms. More, their opinions accurately reflect the dismay the whole world feels about the shocking incapacitation of the Jonathan government in tackling Boko Haram, and especially in effecting the release of the more than 200 Chibok schoolgirls abducted by militants on April 15.

  • Kagame in Nigeria

    Kagame in Nigeria

    Rwandan President Paul Kagame was in Nigeria two weeks ago on a private visit at the invitation of a local Foundation. It was his first visit to Nigeria. The highlight of his short visit was the Spring Lecture on Public leadership of the Oxford and Cambridge Club of Nigeria, which he delivered at the Eko Hotel in Lagos.

    The Spring Lecture, an annual event, is a tradition shared by the two great British Universities. I was delighted to attend the lecture which was well attended by other Oxbridge graduates and their guests. I have visited the country before and I was eager to hear directly from President Kagame a personal account of recent developments in Rwanda, and how it emerged successfully from the tragic event of the genocide there a decade ago.

    President Kagame spoke enthusiastically and with justifiable pride and passion about the phenomenal economic and political progress achieved since he took over power in Rwanda, after the horrifying genocide that virtually destroyed the country. Rwanda is no longer a pariah state. Under his watch, the country is ostensibly more stable now. There is a general sense of normalcy there, though tribal violence and conflict remain a potent threat to its future stability. Rwanda appears to have put its ugly and dark past behind it. Some of the major economic transformation in Rwanda in recent years is being highlighted in the global media as a good example of sound economic management. Its growth rate in recent years has averaged eight per cent. This is striking as President Kagame came to power in the most inauspicious circumstances, after nearly a decade of civil war and genocide in Rwanda, in which nearly one million Tutsis, the minority tribe, were slaughtered by the Hutus, the majority tribe. The violence was a revenge for the 1972 slaughter by the Tutsi of some 200,000 Hutus, an event that attracted little global attention at the time. This time, the Tutsi genocide stirred the conscience of the world. Its primitive and horrifying savagery was incredible, even by African standards. It was worse than the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. It was the worst in Africa’s long history of bloody civil conflicts. But, like the recovery of Nigeria after its bloody civil war, Rwanda’s recovery from the tragic event and the deep seated tribal hatred that caused the genocide has been hailed and admired widely all over the world. Africans tend to forgive and forget more readily than other races.

    In general, poor people tend to forgive and forget more easily, since their means of vengeance is limited. But as Chinua Achebe’s recent controversial book, ‘There was once a Country, and the response to it have shown, the victims of violence do not forgive and forget completely. They simply wait for the right moment for vengeance.

    Rwanda has had a chequered political history of serial and tribal violence. With its undulating features and terraced farming, it is a beautiful, small, but landlocked country in Central Africa. Until its independence in 1962, it was one of the three Belgian colonies in Africa, the others being Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Rwanda and the neighbouring Burundi were so small that Belgium governed them as one territory, Rwanda-Burundi, to reduce the cost of colonial administration. Neither was considered by the Belgians as really viable economically on its own. Because of its poor resources, the Belgians did not care much for the colony. Unlike the Congo, described as a geological scandal, Rwanda and Burundi were very poor countries, the poorest in Africa actually. At independence, the two countries had the lowest per capita income and GDP in Africa. They had little or no natural resources and were almost totally inaccessible to outsiders.

    Even now very little is known about Rwanda. It remains one of the most obscure countries in Africa. There are no foreign correspondents in Kigali. The few in South Africa hardly ever go there. It was brought into global attention by the tragic events that occurred during the genocide.

    In 1973, I had the privilege of visiting Kigali, the capital city of Rwanda and found its natural beauty breath taking. I was serving then as Nigeria’s acting High Commissioner in Uganda, from where we were concurrently accredited to Rwanda. I actually drove there myself with my wife and our two young children, through Uganda, which shares its borders with both the Congo and Rwanda. It was a hazardous journey, but it was the easiest way to get to Kigali from Kampala. The alternative route would have been to fly to Kigali through Nairobi, Kinshasa, and from there to Kigali. There were no regular commercial flights. Most people going to Kigali from Kampala went by road. Our journey took us through frightening hair spin roads, up on the beautiful hills of Rwanda. It took us some six hours to get to Kigali from the Ugandan border where we had spent the night before very comfortably.

    At the time, Kigali was a small, sleepy, and unpretentious town, with only a few tarred roads and one major tourist hotel. Even though Rwanda is recorded as one of the most densely populated countries in Africa, but with a total population of only five million, Kigali itself was probably not more than two million in population then. The future of the country looked really bleak, so bleak that nearly half of its population had emigrated to the neighbouring countries of Uganda, Kenya, and the Congo, in search of employment and better economic opportunities. It was the only way to escape the crushing poverty in Rwanda.

    At its independence, the Belgians left a terrible colonial legacy in Rwanda which eventually led to its long civil war and genocide. In both Rwanda and Burundi, the Belgians yoked together, under one colonial administration, two different and mutually hostile ethnic groups. The Hutus, a Bantu ethnic group, are the majority tribe, with 85 per cent of the population, while the Tutsis, of Nilotic racial stock, are the minority. But in both countries the Belgians contrived to hand over power to the Tutsi minority, which formed the back bone of the Army before and after independence. The Tutsis ran the country as badly as the Belgians. Under their rule, tribal colonialism replaced foreign colonialism. In Burundi where the Belgians handed over power to the Tutsi monarchy, it was overthrown by the Tutsi dominated Army, which embarked on ethnic cleansing against the Hutu majority. In 1993, a Hutu, Melchoir Ndabaye, won the general election, but was assassinated in 1994 by the Tutsi minority which assumed power again. In Rwanda, a Hutu-dominated government was overthrown by a Tutsi militia which installed a Tutsi government. In retaliation, the Hutus struck back by embarking on genocide against the Tutsi minority. That is the origin of the genocide in the country about which there was despair globally.

    Now, President Paul Kagame, a Tutsi, has had some success in ending the despair in Rwanda. He has brought back some hope to the country. Under his rule, the country has recovered from the ravages of its long civil war, and has, by all accounts, made astonishing economic progress. Economic liberalisation has brought in substantial foreign investment in the tourism and service industries. Its FDI per capita is one of the highest in Africa. Kigali, its capital, once a sleepy town, is beginning to look like a modern city, with relatively good infrastructure. Rwanda’s per capita income has increased significantly. President Kagame could boast in his lecture that Rwanda is now 94 per cent literate, and that 90 percent of its population is covered by health insurance. He has tackled public corruption in Rwanda vigorously. The scope and range of Kagame’s reforms and the economic transformation of Rwanda are confirmed by nearly all the reporting multilateral financial and economic institutions, including the WB and the IMF. But unemployment is still rife in the country. For all this, President Kagame deserves credit and commendation.

    But there are still some leadership challenges in Rwanda that President Kagame has to face squarely. He is being denounced increasingly at home and abroad as a despot. These critics argue that he does not tolerate any domestic dissent and that the two elections he won over the years by over 95 per cent in a country with a tribal structure such as Rwanda’s were a sham. Many of his domestic critics have fled abroad to European capitals for their own safety. Some of these media criticism may be exaggerated as claimed by President Kagame, who dismissed them at the lecture as biased. But when I brought this issue up with him after his lecture, he appeared rattled and uncomfortable. He defended his regime angrily. He did not appear keen or willing to discuss the issue, or to introduce the necessary political reforms in Rwanda to complement his impressive economic reforms.

    Like in most African states, tribal colonialism has replaced foreign colonialism in Rwanda, with the Tutsi minority holding the reins of power and subjugating the Hutu majority. There is no easy answer to this complex African political problem. But the tensions generated by tribal politics in Africa can be substantially reduced by allowing all the ethnic groups greater participation in the political process. The democratic process must be free and fair. A greater accountability at all levels of government will also help. Regrettably, this does not appear to be the case in Rwanda now. It is unlikely that its economic transformation under President Kagame can be sustained without the Hutus, the majority tribe, being given a fair share of the political power in Rwanda, now held predominantly by the Tutsi minority. This is the great test that President Kagame now faces. Failure to address this problem will undermine his impressive economic record. Worse still, it may lead again to the horrendous cycle of violent tribal conflict that almost destroyed the country a decade ago.