The MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai wants most regional and foreign observers coming for the elections to be deployed to all rural areas, usually the flash points of political violence in the country. In the past observers have visited rural areas associated with the opposition parties, but have rarely set foot in the Zanu-PF strongholds of the three Mashonaland provinces.

Kenya's President Mwai Kibaki, whose disputed re-election triggered violence that damaged his country's reputation for stability, has appointed a commission of inquiry to investigate the December 27 vote. A statement sent from Kibaki's office on Thursday said the panel would "inquire into all aspects of the General Election ... with particular emphasis on the Presidential Election".

UNHCR is picking up its repatriation operation from Senegal with a second convoy on Thursday bringing home more than 250 Mauritanians. We plan to step up the pace of voluntary returns and organize bi-weekly convoys to reach a target of 3,000 returns per month.

The South African health department has called on drug manufacturers to submit bids to supply the government's antiretroviral (ARV) treatment programme, just days before the current ARV tender is due to expire. AIDS experts and activists said decisions on which drugs to include were made with little consultation.

Leading trade unions from three emerging economies, South Africa, the Philippines and Brazil, voiced concerns in Geneva on Wednesday regarding the risk their industries face in the current Doha round of trade liberalisation talks. Rudi Dicks of COSATU, the South African trade union congress, said that negotiators have failed to take account of the positions of developing countries in the Doha round, which aims to reduce global barriers to trade.

Minority and indigenous groups across the world are among the hardest hit by climate change and often disproportionately affected by climate-related disasters but their plight has yet to be recognised by the international community, a new report says.

The UN refugee agency's introduction last August of cash grants for Burundian returnees appears to have both encouraged more people to go back home and eased their reintegration. In the months since the 50,000 Burundian Francs (about US$45) grant per person was introduced for Burundians in Tanzania, some 35,000 refugees have returned to their country.

Traditional female leaders in Ghana are beginning to open their communal gatherings to discussions of women's legal rights to abortion. The country has one of the most liberal abortion laws in the continent, but women are dying in ignorance of it.

Two Rwandan human rights activists were released on bail early this week and are subjected to report to a Kigali prosecutor every Thursday following their arrest two weeks ago.Nyirahabimana Salma and Umutoni Fatoumata were arrested at Kanombe International Airport in Kigali on their way to Maputo in Mozambique to attend a 3rd Leadership Institute conference organised by Coalition of African Lesbians (CAL) two weeks ago.

HIV positive status is still being associated with homosexuality in Egypt, hence punishable. This came in the wake of arrest of twelve men after one of them disclosed to police that he was living with Aids, and was instantly condemned for homosexuality.

Jacob Zuma, the leader of the ruling African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa, has launched his final attempt to prevent evidence being used against him in a corruption trial. Zuma and his legal team appeared in the Constitutional Court on Tuesday, requesting leave to appeal against the confiscation of documents against him, in 2005.

The Tanzanian Government has arrested two online editors without charge. The two were detained and interrogated for 24 hours in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, on February 18, in what observers of the case say was a politically motivated attempt to shut down the site. The two young editors, Maxence Mello and Mike Mushi, aged 21 and 18 respectively, host the extremely popular Jambo Forums, a public discussion site with more than 2,000 members and 6 million hits in February alone.

The African Union (AU) backed military action against the island of Anjouan's renegade leader Mohamed Bacar in the Comoros archipelago had reached "the point of no return", despite an offer for more talks to resolve the nine month stand-off. "We have exhausted all available opportunities to end the political dispute in the Comoros without any success," Membe told a news briefing in Tanzania's commercial capital, Dar es Salaam on 14 March.

Hundreds of Kenyans have fallen ill after a chemical consignment was dumped on the roadside near the port city of Mombasa, officials said on Thursday. According to a local official, up to 1 500 people have sought treatment at local hospitals, complaining mainly of chest pains and respiratory problems they believe were caused by the leaking container.

The risk of renewed violence in Nigeria's oil-producing Niger Delta is increasing because militants are frustrated by a lack of concrete results from peace talks, a key negotiator said on Wednesday. Kingsley Kuku, a senior member of a government peace committee who also has close links with militants, said the government still had an opportunity to avert violence but it had to start delivering on promises of development for the delta.

Mothers and children in South Africa are dying in alarming numbers. Far from being on track to meet the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of reducing child mortality by two-thirds, the country is among only a dozen worldwide where child deaths are rising. In 2000, South Africa committed to eight MDGs set by the UN, which included reducing child and maternal mortality and reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS by 2015.

As a Kenyan residing abroad I have been searching for an objective view and analysis of what could have transpired in my beloved country Kenya and what could be a positive way forward. I have now found this honest, neutral and objective analysis in Maina Kiai's article.

I sincerely congratulate Maina Kiai for maintaining his objectivity and from his standpoint attempting to convey a professional and thoroughly researched position of what transpired. I would like to urge him to forge ahead without fear or favor and history will record his great deeds! Kudos my brother! The Kenya we want is minus tribalism, nepotism, cultism, political complacency and manipulation of the masses...

Finally as much as we look up to the international community to provide solutions we Kenyans must look inwards as well and clean up our house and our hearts!

May Peace, fairness and sanity prevail in our beloved country Kenya!

The real culprits in the Bush visit to Africa are the black leaders who allow him to get away with this. A criminal is going to do what a criminal does. It is the leaders of the African people that are selling us out. They must be called to task. We cannot continue to allow our so-call leaders to rob us. It is the sins of our leaders that is killing us most. And we continue to let them get away with it.

Bahati Ntama Jacques and Beth Tuckey argue Bush's support for Rwanda through the prism of the Global War on Terror and US access to natural resources will in the long run be disastrous to peace in the DRC.

There is a common flaw in US foreign policy. In giving aid to foreign nations, the United States prioritizes its own foreign policy goals over any standards of good governance. Because this system of support ignores the realities on the ground, it ultimately backfires, undermining US long term interests and fueling instability, conflict, and violations of core human rights standards. Nowhere is this more true than in Africa. Today, President Bush supports corrupt, illegitimate regimes that will either cooperate in the Global War on Terror, provide US companies access to much sought-after natural resources, or both. If history is any indication, this infusion of wealth and military training for such self-interested gains is likely to be disastrous for the people of Africa.

A particularly good example of this is Rwanda – a country that has abused its neighboring people in the Democratic Republic of Congo with support from the United States government. President Paul Kagame will host President Bush this week. Will the leader of the most powerful country in the world have the courage to discuss Rwanda’s negative role in peace and economic development in DRC? Will he castigate Rwandan President Kagame for not providing the political space for Hutus to return to Rwanda? Likely, no. He will announce US support for peace in Congo while simultaneously pushing forward a foreign policy that favors only America’s narrow interests.

From 1996-2003, the people of the Democratic Republic of the Congo suffered a great deal from two wars that pitted Rwanda and its allies against the Congo. The Congolese loss was other people’s gain. According to Global Policy Forum’s Tito Dragon in DR Congo: Dirt Above Ground, Precious Metal Below, “it was the attempt to control coltan mines that was the principal, if not the only, motivation behind the US-backed 1998 occupation of part of DRC territory by Rwanda and Uganda.” In fact, in 2004, after a three-year investigation, a UN Panel of Experts implicated three major US companies for fueling war in DRC by collaborating with rebel groups trafficking coltan. United States assistance to Rwanda continues today largely due to Kagame’s willingness to be engaged in the US War on Terror; and again, the people of DRC lose.

Though he publicly denies any direct involvement, most officials agree that President Kagame funds renegade General Laurent Nkunda’s militia in DRC – a militia whose primary purpose appears to be keeping Hutu rebels away from the Rwandan border. A UN report accuses Nkunda’s Tutsi faction of some of the worst human rights abuses of any rebel group currently operating in the eastern region. Though Kagame has undoubtedly brought strong economic development to the small great lakes nation, he has failed to adequately deal with the legacy of the 1994 genocide – the strained relationship between Hutus and Tutsis.

Bush knows that Rwanda’s involvement in the armed conflict in DRC delays peace in eastern Congo, but he continues to authorize military aid to Rwanda. In 2007, the United States armed and trained Rwandan soldiers with $7.2 million from the US defense program Africa Contingent Operations Training Assistance (ACOTA) and $260,000 from the International Military and Education (IMET) program. At the same time, the US is involved in facilitating peace talks between Rwanda and DRC and the various rebel groups operating in eastern Congo. Not only does arming Rwanda contradict the peace process, but it also delays the recovery of Rwanda from its 1994 genocide.

During the Cold War, the US provided military aid to African countries to counter communism. Many of those countries – Somalia, Sudan, Liberia, and DRC – have now become hotspots of violence and economic failure in Africa. It is no surprise that lending arms and financial support to corrupt dictators and human rights abusers contributes to destabilization, but still the US government has yet to learn its lesson. Today, the rationale for providing military aid to countries like Rwanda is to counter terrorism; likely, the methods and outcomes will be largely the same as they were in the 1980’s.

The Department of Defense argues that by training and equipping African military forces, it will bring greater stability and legitimacy to African governments. The case for professionalizing militaries was also made during the Cold War and it was a policy that ultimately failed. It should not be used again today to justify the self-interests of the United States.

This week, President Bush has the opportunity to encourage African governments to engage peacefully and democratically with their people and with each other, but only if the Administration’s actions are seen as legitimate by African nations. Most countries have voiced a vehement ‘no’ to the creation and implementation of a new US military command for Africa (AFRICOM) and other US military activities on the continent. For the sake of countries like DRC, Mr. Bush should begin with a drawing back of his own defense policy in Africa.

*Bahati Ntama Jacques is the Policy Analyst at Africa Faith and Justice Network (AFJN) in Washington, DC. He is Congolese.

**Beth Tuckey is the Associate Director of Program Development and Policy at Africa Faith and Justice Network (AFJN) in Washington, DC.

***Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Neil Watkins tackles the unfinished agenda on debt, calls for an audit of past lending in Africa by the United States and international financial institutions including the IMF and World Ban in order to look at which debts are odious, onerous, or illegal.

President Bush in Africa is looking to secure his legacy in part through the lens of his administration’s development initiatives on the continent. One of those initiatives is the administration’s support for expanded debt relief for the continent.

To take a closer look at this Administration’s record on debt, let us start with a question that Africa-based civil society groups often start with when describing the debt issue: Who Owes Whom?

Take the case of the Democratic Republic of Congo. The United States, the World Bank and IMF, and other creditors lent former President Mobutu Sese Seko billions of dollars in the 1970s and 1980s, knowing full well that the funds would not benefit the people. This was a price they were willing to pay in the context of the Cold War to win then Zaire’s allegiance to the West. But this clearly odious and illegitimate debt remains on the books today – over $9 billion worth in fact, and the people of the DRC are still paying for the sins of a leader they didn’t want.

But the Bush administration has supported debt cancellation in Africa. Does Africa owe President Bush a debt of gratitude? Let’s look at the Bush administration’s record on Africa’s debt. In 2005, the Bush administration, together with the UK, took strong leadership at the G-8 summit in Gleneagles, Scotland that year, and agreed to provide the possibility of 100% debt stock cancellation of eligible debts to eligible countries. This was important because up until this point, only debt relief – reduction of payments – rather than outright cancellation, was possible.

The initiative championed by the Bush Administration has since become known as the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI). Under this program, 23 countries have received 100% cancellation of eligible debts, 19 of them in Africa. Another 20 countries are potentially eligible for the program but have not yet seen their debts cancelled. Added together with previous rounds of debt cancellation, this has meant that eligible nations are saving about $2 billion in debt payments each year

The money saved from debt relief has been put to good use. Of the five countries President Bush will visit on his trip, four -- Benin, Tanzania, Rwanda, and Ghana – have received debt cancellation under the MDRI. In Tanzania, debt relief led to a 50% increase in primary school enrollment. In Ghana, freed up funds supported the rehabilitation of essential major highways and feeder roads in the main agricultural areas, and to support education and health initiatives. In Benin, relief bolstered investment in health and education and funded small-holder projects in agriculture.

The other country President Bush will visit on his trip – Liberia – just recently moved towards eligibility for the official IMF/World Bank debt relief program with the strong support of the administration. But Liberia has not yet seen its more than $3.5 billion debt – much of it run up by the odious regimes of Samuel Doe and Charles Taylor – cancelled outright yet.

It is clear that the Bush Administration has provided leadership on debt relief that has benefited a number of African countries. But President Bush could do even more. He could return from Africa - - inspired by seeing first-hand the impacts of relief to date – and address the unfinished agenda on debt, in turn cementing his legacy in this area.

He should support the expansion of debt cancellation to all countries that need it to reach global poverty-reducing goals, including countries devastated by HIV/AIDS—such as Lesotho -- that have not been included in agreements for debt cancellation to date.

Second, Bush should put an end to unconscionable practices of so-called “vulture funds.” Vulture funds are private creditors that buy up distressed developing country debt on the secondary markets, then refuse to join other creditors in the debt relief process and instead sue poor country governments for a big mark-up. Last year, Zambia had to pay $15 million to Donegal International, a vulture fund that paid $3 million for the debt originally. The President should support changes to US law that would make profiteering by vulture funds illegal. While that work is underway, he could immediately reach out to non-Paris Club creditors in the US’s sphere of influence and urge them to sign onto a new Paris Club agreement that commits creditors not to on-sell claims on the secondary market.

Another problem facing Africa now is a rapid re-accumulation of debts, including massive new lending from China. The administration’s plan to address this problem has focused on an IMF/World Bank framework which punishes debtors by hardening the terms of soft loans they get from the World Bank if they borrow too much. But this approach is likely to only worsen the problem and punishes poor countries without addressing creditor co-responsibility for the problem. Only a strong, binding international system for responsible lending and sovereign debt restructuring which holds creditors and debtors responsible can ensure debt sustainability in the future.

Finally, to finally answer the question of who owes whom, there should be an audit of past lending in Africa by the United States and international financial institutions including the IMF and World Bank. Such an audit should look at which debts are odious, onerous, or illegal. Having this information will help us to learn lessons from the past and avoid the same mistakes in the future.

To enhance his legacy in this area, President Bush could announce his support for the bi-partisan Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending (S. 2166 / H. 2634) which addresses many of the aforementioned elements of the unfinished agenda on debt and is currently pending in Congress.

*Neil Watkins is National Coordinator of Jubilee USA Network, an alliance of religious organizations, development agencies, and human rights groups working for debt cancellation and responsible lending for impoverished nations.

**Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Gerald LeMell, the executive director of Africa Action forecasts US Africa policy and argues that In this election year, the U.S. government will pursue a mixed approach to elections in Africa, upholding democratic ideals or looking the other way, depend- ing on military, economic and political alliances. Climate change will be a hot topic in U.S. electoral debates, but it is unlikely that the devastating environmental prospects for Africa will be featured, much less addressed, in U.S.-Africa policy this year.

The Bush Administration's fixation on security and the "war on terror" is already escalating the militarization of U.S. policy in Africa in 2008. In his last year in office, President George W. Bush will no doubt duplicitously continue to promote economic policies that exacerbate inequalities while seeking to salvage his legacy as a compassionate conservative with rhetorical support for addressing human rights challenges including conflict in Sudan and continued promotion of his unilateral HIV/AIDS initiative. The third prong of U.S.-Africa policy in 2008 will be the contin- ued and relentless pursuit of African resources, especially oil, with clear implications for U.S. mili- tary and economic policy.

Private Sector Role

Deepening U.S. military ties to the African continent are visible in both the official and private sectors. Since 2002, the U.S. International Military and Training Program (IMET) has invested approximate- ly $10 million a year to train African military person- nel, and the FY 2008 budget request increased this sum to $13.7 million. At the same time, under State Department oversight, commercial sales by U.S. manufacturers delivered $281 million worth of weapons and equipment from FY 2006-2007 to Algeria alone. Such licensed commercial sales to sub- Saharan Africa were just $900,000 in 2000, but for FY 2008 they are estimated to reach $92 million, an 80% increase from FY 2006. At present, the U.S. has Cooperative Security Location (CSL) agreements with five African countries, which are now opera- tional in Entebbe, Uganda; Libreville, Gabon; Accra, Ghana; Dakar, Senegal; and Lusaka, Zambia. There is also a new joint U.S.-Ugandan intelligence fusion center, just outside of Kampala in Uganda.

This escalation has not gone unnoticed. Concerned civil society groups in the U.S. and across the conti- nent of Africa have expressed persistent apprehension over the potential dangers of this change and the absence of any accountability in the process. Democratic governance, sustainable development and human rights are serious challenges in many coun- tries in Africa, but considerable progress has been made by activists, advocates, and civil society organi- zations over the last few decades. The militarization of aid to Africa could dramatically sharpen the slope of this already uphill battle for social, political and economic justice on the continent.

The militarization of Africa comes at a time when the continent can least afford it. An Oxfam report on armed conflict in Africa released in October estimates that the cost of conflict at the expense of the conti- nent's development over a 15-year period was nearly $300 billion. According to this study, between 1990 and 2005, 23 African nations were involved in con- flict, and on average this cost African economies $18 billion a year. By these figures, the cost of conflict was equal to the amount of money received in aid during the same period.

The fundamental question for many is whether the U.S. will utilize this increased military presence to support freedom, self determination, growth, pros- perity, and accountability on behalf of the majority of the nearly one billion people in Africa or if this new initiative will instead serve to oversee surrogate nations whose leadership is accountable first to U.S. security and economic interests.

AFRICOM's Inspiration

This growing militarization of U.S.-Africa policy is certain to escalate sharply in 2008 as the United States hurtles full speed ahead with the launch of Bush's still ill-defined Africa Command (AFRICOM). While AFRICOM appears to be a done deal, with a budget request of $389 for FY 2009, the public explanations and justifications for it can only be described as seriously confusing if not downright evasive.

In October 2003, James Jay Carafano and Nile Gardiner, both from the Heritage Foundation, a con- servative think tank, proposed to the Bush Administration the creation of a centralized Africa command for the U.S. military. The Carafano/Gardiner proposal makes clear that the objective is to preserve U.S. access to African oil and other natural resources on the continent. Africa pro- duces 90% of the world's cobalt; 64% of its man- ganese; 50% of gold; 40% of platinum; 30% of ura- nium; 20% of total petroleum; 70% of cocoa; 60% of coffee; over 80% of coltan and 50% of palm oil. The Heritage report also points to the strategic importance of Africa in the global "war on terror." This proposal resonated with the Bush administration.

Altruistic Motives?

AFRICOM began initial operations in October 2007 with temporary headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany. But much like 150 years ago when Western countries argued that their real goals in Africa were to bring liberty and democratic ideals to the continent, the Bush Administration has been trying to convince skeptical audiences in Africa and elsewhere that AFRICOM is ultimately driven by altruistic motives. AFRICOM's projected structure would place human- itarian work previously done by the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) under the directive of Department of Defense (DOD). To U.S. and African civil society groups, and even to AFRICOM's critics in Congress, the Bush administration has argued that the State Department will remain responsible for diplomacy and development while AFRICOM will "support" USAID and other humanitarian organiza- tions in the delivery of humanitarian aid and assis- tance. The Bush administration suggests there will be more civilian oversight of AFRICOM than any other military command. Yet it remains hard to see how African policy will not be driven by military engage- ment as opposed to a genuine partnership if the State Department and USAID are positioned under the Defense Department in AFRICOM. Military commands are simply not designed to do humanitar- ian work. For commissioned officers and the Defense Department, humanitarian work will never trump military objectives. This reality was clearly illustrated in Iraq when the State Department and humanitarian groups were simply cut out of planning discussions around the build up to the inva- sion and its aftermath. AFRICOM appears likely to follow a similar trajectory.

The United States is telling African governments that AFRICOM is simply a restructuring of African pro- grams currently split among the existing U.S. global military units of the U.S. European Command (EUCOM), U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), and U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM). General William Ward, AFRICOM's designated commander, made the case for his new command at a meeting with African Union (AU) leaders in Addis Ababa in early November, arguing that the United States has a national interest in helping to "stabilize" Africa. "We come and do things to assist our African partners in increasing their capacity, their capability to provide a stable environment here in Africa, " he said. When asked whether AFRICOM was "simply a militariza- tion of the continent" he replied, "Absolutely false; not the case." His answer is, of course, contradicted by the very reality of the increasing militarization of U.S. foreign policy in Africa over the last five years.

Soldier of Fortune

AFRICOM is being touted in Soldier of Fortune and other private military contractor industry publica- tions as ushering in a bountiful new job market. In Iraq, contractors hired by the U.S. government were accountable to no one, resulting in unacceptable human rights violations. It is reasonable to be con- cerned that mercenaries and other contractors hired for AFRICOM's work will follow a similar pattern. African voices from civil society and from democrati- cally elected African governments should be heard and heeded in decisions relating to the location of AFRICOM and its role in Africa. Thus far, only Liberia has given any public support for this initiative. Other nations and regional bodies including the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have expressed deep concern about a deepened U.S. mili- tary footprint on African soil.

It's important for Africa advocates in the United States to stand in solidarity with African civil society voices on the continent by challenging not only the existence of AFRICOM but seeking several impor- tant changes to the proposed program. AFRICOM should decouple the U.S. Department of State and USAID from the Defense Department to ensure that U.S.-Africa policy will be driven by diplomacy, devel- opment and genuine partnership, not military engagement. Clear lines of accountability and mecha- nisms for transparency must be established not only for AFRICOM but also for any private military con- tractors employed by the United States in Africa to ensure the protection of the rule of law, democracy and human rights on the continent. Funding for AFRICOM and the increasing militarization of aid and engagement in Africa should be reallocated to serve a comprehensive agenda that promotes just security by supporting sustainable development, deeper debt cancellation for impoverished countries in Africa, and fully funding the fight against HIV/AIDS and other health challenges on the continent.

AFRICOM raises more questions then the Bush administration is able to answer at this point. Who does the United States intend to stabilize by intro- ducing more military equipment and approving more arms sales into the region? How does the United States decide when to use force in "stabilizing" a con- flict? If people are protesting unfair corporate prac- tices near the grounds of an oil company, will the United States use force, or encourage the use of force by African military units, to protect these corporate assets? Will U.S. soldiers be accountable in any way to African governments or their citizens? To what degree will the United States employ mercenaries and other contractors in Africa? Will U.S. economic interests trump the rule of law, democracy and accountability in Africa? The answers to the questions above will go a long way to determine whether AFRICOM constitutes a solution to a bureaucratic challenge of a region divided between other global military commands or is actually likely to encourage future conflicts.

Kenya

It's only February, but the recent turbulence in heretofore-stable Kenya brings U.S. policy toward Africa in 2008 into focus. U.S. interests in Kenya are well documented. Kenya's role as a manufacturing and financial hub for East Africa makes it an appeal- ing partner for Western investments. The country's geographic location, bordering on Somalia, a col- lapsed state, also appeals to U.S. security interests, particularly given President Mwai Kibaki's history of unswerving support for the Bush Administration's "war on terror." It is therefore not surprising that the United States initially responded to the dubious offi- cial election outcome and immediate swearing in of Kibaki for a second term by calling on the Kenyan people to "accept the results…calmly."

Once it became apparent that the elections were clearly tarnished, various U.S. officials backtracked and engaged in a clumsy game of semantics regarding what was actually said. But all of Africa saw the U.S. rally around Meles Zenawi when he also claimed to win the Ethiopian election in 2005, despite over- whelming evidence that he and his Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) had lost badly. Zenawi immediately cracked down on the opposition and at least 200 people were killed and 700 were injured. The EPRDF never relin- quished control of power and two years later, Zenawi's U.S.-backed troops invaded Somalia.

U.S. support of favored illegitimate regimes like Zenawi's in Ethiopia and the unhelpful, contradicto- ry U.S. diplomatic response to the botched elections in Kenya risk encouraging leadership around the con- tinent to ignore the will of their citizens when they have international backing. Do these two instances foreshadow the standard AFRICOM response to con- tested elections in Africa?

Other Elections

In 2002, Kenya appeared to be a shining example of the possibilities of democracy and the genuine emer- gence of freedom and real stability, after frequent government critic Kibaki was elected in a contest regarded as free and fair. The spectacle of Kenya in turmoil is certainly distressing to other democratic movements across the continent in a year that will see several other important African elections that may expe- rience unhealthy influence from U.S. militarization. Longtime U.S. foe, but now a new oil friend and military partner, Angola, will have its first legislative elections in September. Half of the country has regis- tered to vote in the long-awaited polls as citizens hope to usher in a new era of multiparty democracy after Angola's 27-year civil war ended in 2002. The legislative elections were initially scheduled to be held in 1997. A presidential election will follow next year. The Angola opposition group, the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), has accused the government of deliberately delaying the elections. U.S. military operations in Angola have been growing by leaps and bounds since 2002, with arms sales up over of 1000% and ongoing International Military and Training Program trainings and security agreements with the U.S. Navy.

Divided Ivory Coast leaders aim to hold long-delayed elections in the first half of 2008. Rebels have con- trolled the northern half of the West African state and world's top cocoa producer since a 2002-2003 civil war, but President Laurent Gbagbo and former rebel leader Guillaume Soro, who became prime min- ister in April 2007, agreed in March 2007 on a process of disarmament, reunification and organiza- tion of elections. Many observers inside and outside the country are concerned by the slow pace of progress on practical aspects of this agreement and fear that the elections will be postponed again. Despite the fact that the United States has so clearly supported undemocratic regimes when it has served a military, economic or other political interest, the United States claims to be aggressively working for "democracy" in Zimbabwe. Although some in the Bush Administration seem to be realizing that overt U.S. engagement in Zimbabwe has been counter-pro- ductive, the United States has been intensifying sanc- tions and increased funding of opposition groups. This economic pressure for regime change not only strengthens Robert Mugabe's hand when blaming outside forces for the current economic crisis but it has the potential to undermine the opposition's legit- imacy both now and if they were to gain power.

The United States ought to cease and desist from this antagonistic unilateral engagement and instead step back to work with other elements of the international community to develop a multilateral engagement. U.S. policies should facilitate bringing together regional actors like Southern African Development Community and the African Union with internation- al agencies in order to promote the democratic process, a national and popular constitutional reform process, economic justice and human rights. A major shift in South Africa's political landscape occurred at the end of 2007, when the African National Congress (ANC) announced that its inten- tion to back Jacob Zuma in the 2009 presidential elections. Given the ANC's overwhelming strength, Zuma will be the heavy favorite to win. Still, 2008 will be an important year in the lead up to elections South Africa.

Sudan's Multiple Conflicts

Perhaps the most interesting upcoming African elec- tion from the U.S. perspective will be in the Sudan. The U.S.-brokered and Kenya-hosted Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005 ended the civil war between North and South, and declared that the year 2009 will witness an unprecedented and internation- ally monitored general election in the Sudan. In 2008 it will be determined whether these elections are a realistic possibility. As deadly violence against civil- ians raged on in Darfur in 2007, serious fractures emerged in the North-South peace agreement. The complete implementation of all the provisions of the CPA, including a nationwide census to prepare for the 2009 elections is critical to the process of democ- ratizing Sudan and achieving peace and development for its entire population.

There is little indication, however, that President Omar Al-Bashir's National Congress Party (NCP) regime in Khartoum has any intention of jeopardiz- ing its hold on power, and it will attempt to delay the election process as long as possible unless it faces credible pressure from the international community. If a legitimate census is not carried out and a national electoral commission is not successfully established and operating in 2008, a serious blow will be struck both to the CPA and the ability of Southerners to wait for the 2011 referendum that will determine if the South will stay united with the North of Sudan or opt for separation.

This election will be of particular interest because the United States has taken a strong rhetorical stance against the Sudanese government regarding Darfur while simultaneously maintaining strong intelligence and military ties with Khartoum, including arms sales and official military trainings. On December 31, Bush signed divestment legislation into law and pledged to uphold sanctions against the Sudanese government. For the first time, the Bush administra- tion seems to be becoming more comprehensive, at least in its public statements, in its approach to Sudan.

New Envoy

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice swore in Richard Williamson as the new U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan on January 7 and the following day Bush made a statement committing the U.S. to supporting the implementation of the CPA, the deployment of an effective peacekeeping force in Darfur and the diplo- matic engagement necessary to support serious politi- cal dialogue between the region's stakeholders. Unfortunately, in the past several years, we have seen the Bush administration use powerful rhetoric that in reality meant nothing on the ground and masked insufficient or contradictory U.S. diplomatic action. Bush's statement says that the CPA, "laid the groundwork for lasting peace and unity for all of Sudan," a sentiment that is popularly promoted by policymakers and advocates alike. Africa Action's dia- logue with Sudanese in each region of the country reveals that the CPA - while a critical agreement that must be implemented - should not be held up as an exact model for all other agreements. Circumstances are different in every region and all new peace processes must both address these unique regional characteristics and avoid repeating some of the mis- takes of the CPA by being more inclusive, more par- ticipatory, and more transparent to the general Sudanese population.

The United States must also follow through with diplomatic engagement once peace agreements have been signed to ensure timely implementation. The real process of peace and justice happens after the political negotiations have been concluded when the agreements are put into practice.

If the Bush Administration is serious in its commit- ment to a comprehensive and productive Sudan poli- cy, it must prioritize these areas over the "war on ter- ror." It must use its influence on Sudan to ensure the prompt and comprehensive implementation of the CPA. In Darfur, it must use its leverage in the inter- national community to resolve the outstanding issues of UN command and control of the African Union/UN hybrid peacekeeping force known as UNAMID and to ensure that this peacekeeping force is fully resourced and deployed. The United States and the international community must not allow Khartoum to veto troop contributions from nations around the world. Tensions with Chad are heating up on the western border of Darfur, and the United States must begin to adopt a regional perspective when addressing this conflict.

There are over 8,000 helicopters among NATO countries, many of them that could pass the "hot and high" test needed to work in Darfur's extreme heat and high levels of dust. Darfur needs at least 70 of these, but contributing countries are resisting, argu- ing that they don't have the helicopters or that they are anxious about the command and control issues of UNAMID. The U.S. has the opportunity to finance the provision of helicopters by other NATO coun- tries as well as leverage the necessary international leadership to ensure UN command and control of the force. For myriad reasons, U.S. troops in Darfur are neither politically possible not practically desir- able. However, there might be ways for the U.S. to loan the United Nations the helicopters and other support vehicles that are essential for UNAMID. The deployment and support of UNAMID must go hand-in-hand with renewed efforts to build an inclu- sive and participatory peace process for the Darfur region and for the North of Sudan where new conflict is emerging. The International Criminal Court must get full international support to do the important work of accountability in Sudan's many conflicts.

Horn of Africa

The primacy of U.S. security interests and militariza- tion in the Horn of Africa has gone a long way towards further destabilizing an already volatile area. As part of Operation Enduring Freedom's Trans- Sahara Counter-Terrorism Initiative, U.S. naval ves- sels have engaged in several military strikes in Somalia. Over a thousand people have died since U.S. war planes bombed towns in southern Somalia and up to half a million people have fled the erup- tion of violence in Mogadishu to live in camps. The United States has allied with unpopular and repres- sive Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi and orches- trated the invasion of Somalia by Ethiopian troops. This appears to have accomplished little more than another human rights and humanitari- an crisis with hundreds of thousands of internally dis- placed people, untold num- bers of refugees in neighbor- ing countries, and regular reports noting the brutality of rape, beatings, shooting and indiscriminate shelling by all parties to the conflict in and around Mogadishu.

The exercise has weakened Ethiopia considerably in its still-unresolved border dispute with Eritrea (despite an Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission decision in 2002 which the Ethiopian government refuses to abide by even after both countries' repeated pledges that the decision of the commission would be binding and final). Ethiopia's actions have also angered and inspired ethnic Somalis in Ethiopia's Ogaden region. Given the increasingly complicated and tense reality on the Horn today, it would be interesting to see if American officials believe that U.S. policy in the region actually achieved any count- er-terrorism goals. Ironically, it is only in the interna- tionally unrecognized but clearly democratic state of Somaliland (known as northwest Somalia), that there is peace.

*For the full article, please visit the Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at . Established in 1996, Foreign Policy In Focus is a network of policy analysts, advocates, and activists committed to “making the United States a more responsible global leader and global partner.” For more information, visit www.fpif.org

**Gerald LeMelle is the Executive Director of Africa Action and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus. Michael Swigert, Africa Action's Department of Policy Analysis and Communication Program Associate provided research support.

***Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

The full article is available at

Dear Pambazuka Community,

We are very pleased to bring you this Special Issue, a collaboration with Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF). First Clinton, then Blair and now Bush – it seems Africa is fast becoming a legacy maker. With Iraq up in flames and Afghanistan still at war, and with a Pakistan where democratic voices are assassinated, Africa (a few select countries) for Bush seems like a logical destination. But what is his legacy?

Activist organizations Africa Action, Africa Faith and Justice Network (AFJN), International Labor Rights Forum, and Jubilee USA Network tackle this question by looking at the various components to his foreign policy: AIDS, Global War on Terror/AFRICOM, and Debt Relief.

We have also included in this Special Issue the contact information and the general take of a number of these organization on Bush for those who may wish to follow up on this conversation.

A very special thanks to Emira Woods, Co-Director of Foreign Policy In Focus (www.fpif.org) for being the force behind this special issue.

Thank you,
Pambazuka Editors

The International Journal of Transitional Justice (IJTJ) is pleased to announce the introduction of a Journal Fellows Support Programme aimed at increasing the publication and dissemination of pieces from south-based transitional justice practitioners and scholars. The Programme will provide the opportunity for five applicants to develop their writing, analytical and comparative content skills through a short training workshop followed by a one year e-mentorship by leading scholars and practitioners in the field globally as well as the IJTJ Editorial team.

Dear all Kenyans and friends of Kenya,

I am desperately trying to reach out to other people in the US who are concerned and outraged about the current situation in Kenya, and to see ways that I and others may help take unified action in any possible way. In that vein, I am reaching out to all Kenyans living in the US and friends of Kenya, and am proposing the idea of trying to form and expand a network of people in the US in order to establish a kind of united front to vigorously advocate for the US to play a more neutral, multilateral and transparent role in the negotiation process for peace with truth and justice in Kenya. For those who have been following the situation you will recognize the last line as the name of the coalition of Kenyan human rights and civil society organizations, "Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice," whom I think we should be showing solidarity with by amplifying their demands and statements, particularly regarding US involvement in Kenya, to leaders and media outlets here in the US by forming a "US Coalition for Peace with Truth and Justice in Kenya." An additional focus for those in the US is to raise awareness of the situation in Kenya and to educate members of the press to stop inaccurately depicting the situation as an extreme "shock," as a result of just "tribal conflict," and underestimating the US's interests and role in the situation. Also, the disproportionate affect of the humanitarian situation on specific groups must be highlighted without trivializing or sensationalizing it, particularly violence against women and children, and the disruption in the flow of essential goods and services throughout eastern Africa (especially medicines such as antidiarrheals, antibiotics, malaria meds, ARVs, etc.).

There are certainly many people and organizations in the US who are already doing great work on this, and this is not an attempt to be purposely ignorant of the great work they are doing, it is merely an effort to try to reach out and connect as many people as possible who are concerned and want to take united action on this issue. If I, like I imagine I may be, am ignorant enough to not know that such a unified network already exists, then I will immediately withdraw my proposal and humbly ask to be included in the previously established network(s). Nevertheless, there is the need for an organized listserv in order for such a campaign (if that's what it is) to stay up-to-date and to communicate effectively with each other, that is if such a listserv/group is not already established either. If no such organized group/listserv already exists then I have created a simple google group for now, but perhaps more tech savvy people have better suggestions. The name of the google group is "US Coalition for Peace with Truth and Justice in Kenya" and the email address of the group is [email][email protected] Please suggest any other better ideas, otherwise PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THIS WIDELY.

One initial proposed action is to encourage lots of people to submit questions to the upcoming US Presidential candidate debates to pose questions to the candidates in order to get them to publicly address and raise awareness of the situation in Kenya and propose what as President they would do to promote peace, truth and justice in Kenya, and the surrounding Horn and East of Africa (i.e., will they continue to prioritize US "national security" interests and actions of the "war on terror" in the region, or rather will they prioritize investing in community healthcare capacity, for example). Pending the response I get from people here, I will post more contact information on this. A basic idea is also for a massive US organizational sign-on letter, unless this is already underway by anybody?

I am also including people in Kenya and Kenyan organizations, including those part of "Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice," on this email and would greatly appreciate any and all comments, concerns and suggestions that you may have for us here in the US who are seeking ways to help in both the humanitarian situation and the political situation by taking account of the interests and actions of the US government and other US actors in Kenya.

Thank you all for your stern devotion and commitment to peace, truth and justice in Kenya! I am desperately eager to hear back from any and all of you.

The Human Rights Tools website now features more than 60 short courses and summer schools spanning 2008 and 2009, from the general introductions to very specialized courses on indigenous peoples, discrimination, women’s rights, and more.

Kenya does not have a constitutional court, the Court of Appeal has declared. Eleven days ago, the Court of Appeal told High Court judge, Justice Joseph Nyamu, that the Constitution had not created a constitutional court with supervisory powers over all the other courts. Nyamu, who heads the Constitutional and Judicial Review division of the High Court, ran into trouble after he asserted that the constitutional court was mandated to inquire into alleged violations of fundamental rights and freedoms of a litigant that may arise from a decision of the Court of Appeal or the High Court.

The Institute has the opportunity to fill alternatively 1 PhD Grant, or 1 postdoctoral Grant Starting May 2008 (negotiable). The grant is to be awarded in the context of the Max Planck Fellow Research Group "Law, Organizations, Science, and Technology" (LOST) headed by Professor Richard Rottenburg (Max Planck Fellow). The current research focus is on "Biomedicine in Africa". Special attention is given to medical practice and argumentation in juridical contexts such as in the control of epidemics, the legitimisation and legalisation of diagnostic and healing practices, intellectual property rights, medical evidence in various forms of courts of justice etc. (for more details see

The Jebsen Center for Counter-Terrorism Studies—with support from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and co-sponsorship from the Conflict and Human Security Studies Program at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point; the Fletcher Institute for Human Security; the Feinstein International Center at Tufts University; and Synexxus, Inc.—presents a two-day conference, “Countering Terrorism in Africa Through Human Security Solutions” on Thursday, February 28 and Friday, February 29 at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

The International Knowledge Network of Women in Politics, iKNOW Politics, is designed to increase the number and effectiveness of women in political life by utilizing a technology enabled forum to provide access to resources, expertise, dialogue, and knowledge creation on women's political participation. iKNOW Politics seeks Network Facilitator: International Knowledge Network of Women in Politics (iKNOW Politics) / UNIFEM / New York, NY, USA. Closing date: February 25, 2008.

The United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) seeks a senior professional to support its external relations strategy in order to strengthen understanding and support for work on gender equality and women's empowerment in the inter-governmental bodies - the UNDP-UNFPA Executive Board and the UN Commission on the Status of Women - and will also support UNIFEM's cooperation with its Consultative Committee. The Advisor will also cover other inter-governmental processes that are relevant to efforts to advance gender equality and women's empowerment. Closing date: March 03, 2008.

The Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) is looking for young development professionals for a number of positions in Africa which would give these professionals excellent exposure to cross sectoral development issues. These posts are particularly suited to development professionals seeking a unique and challenging international development experience. The individual would have an excellent opportunity to make a contribution to some of the most important challenges facing modern day Africa. Deadline: 14 March 2008.

The African Population and Health Research Center (APHRC), in partnership with the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and Ford Foundation, is pleased to announce the African Doctoral Dissertation Research Fellowships (ADDRF), a new fellowship program to support doctoral students at African universities whose theses address issues relating to heath systems strengthening in Africa.

We can see conflicts everywhere in Africa. Some are visible, others are invisible.

The Africans must think about the real causes of the problems. We should think Africa and not only our countries or nations. We should think seriously about who we are. We are never what others say or think we are. We have some concepts but I believe that they are not OUR concepts. We should be honest we ourselves. What is really ours? We are really imitating the Europeans. We are Africans with our typical nature and history. We are not inferiors to other people; but we do not know who we are. Why? Because we are not honest enough to recognize our imposed limitations. Today is my first time to send my comment. It is a sort of introduction to what bit by bit we can share. I am very concerned with the Unity of and in Africa.

There are ethnic conflicts. We do not think Africa. We still think in terms of TRIBES. We need men of UNITY and for unity. I personally feel good in Zimbabwe. I Feel good in Cameroon in Gabon, in Ethiopia, in South Africa, in Botswana, in Uganda, in Rwanda, in Kenya and so forth. I feel comfortable with ALL peoples of Africa. I love all peoples of the world. I like the Chinese, the Europeans, the Americans, the Jews people and the Arabs.

In AFRICA we have to think deeper of our concepts. I am afraid but I think that the concepts we proudly exhibit are not our own concepts. We need some ORIGINALITY. We need some AUTHENTICITY. Not the word authenticity but we need AUTHENTICITY. Not a false AUTHENTICITY. How? We should COOPERATE. We are trying to COOPERATE with the EUROPEANS but there is NO UNITY among the countries and peoples of Africa. I cannot say among the Nations of Africa. We are countries; We have territories and populations; but WHERE ARE THE NATIONS OF AFRICA?

There are many aspects we can take into consideration so that we reach this goal. We have to stop CONTROLLING AND MANIPULATING OTHERS.I believe that this must be the first step. WE HAVE TO CHANGE WHAT WE ARE NOW. There is no other way. If we do not change NOW, the future of Africa will be according to what WE ARE SOWING NOW.

Thank you for accepting to share with Africa and my brothers and sisters in Africa.
Yours for the Unity of Africa.

Angola, Feb. 2008

Dear Andile,

I hear your disappointment (Kenya: struggling for peace? - and share it.

Which is why I work with Kenyans for Peace WITH Truth and Justice. This is a coalition of over 40 legal, human rights, and governance organizations (including grassroots collectives representing the youth of Nairobi's slum areas), and individual Kenyans, such as myself. Prior to the elections, many of these organizations were already ferocious advocates for justice and equity for all Kenyans.

From the outset, KPTJ has insisted that any resolution of the crisis must address the injustices at all levels - historic, and current - which precipitated this catastrophe. KPTJ has categorically rejected calls for "peace" and "dialogue" from the parties who are really seeking violent suppression of the poorest and most disenfranchised Kenyans, so that "normal life" may resume for the wealthy.

KPTJ continues to offer an analysis of the violence in Kenya that traces each strand of violence to its source, and to hold the initiators of each form of violence accountable. We have challenged the excessive use of police violence, and "shoot to kill" orders, as well as uneven and selective policing that allowed Nairobi slums and marginalized areas of the country to burn, while police ringed an empty Uhuru Park to prevent peaceful assembly and protest. We have named the specific militia mobilised in Central, Rift Valley and Nyanza provinces, by individual political actors, and described their operations.

Relevant excerpts from KPTJ statements that speak to your concerns:

Calling for peace is not enough. We will only slide into civil war if we cannot see through this. We must resist the fear, name the problem accurately and desist from the build up to the declaration of a state of emergency, the deployment of the military or, worse, the usurpation of civilian governance by military governance. (Muthoni Wanyeki, ED, Kenya Human Rights Commission)

The cause of the current political crises in Kenya is two pronged. First, the poorly managed electoral process dealing with the Presidential Poll result. This acted as a trigger for the Second more entrenched and deep rooted problem that manifested itself in the explosion of violence of a magnitude unknown in post-independent Kenya. The simmering anger that was ignited is a result of a combination of historical injustices from the time of Kenya's colonial past, and the failure of successive governments of Kenyatta, Moi and Kibaki to address comprehensively the problems of inequality of its citizens.

In particular the challenges presented by landlessness, gender inequality, youth unemployment, the widening gap between the extremely wealthy and extremely poor citizens and the marginalization of some communities. Further political campaigns hyped up expectations of Kenyans in promising to redress these issues overnight whereas a structured and systematic approach with realistic time-lines is required to do so. Resolving the issues around truth and justice, particularly around issues of corruption and past violence also meant that the political class on both sides of the divide would have to give up their own in a "no sacred cows" policy which neither was/is willing to do.
(Njoki Ndungu, speaking before the US House of Representatives)

The KPTJ roadmap to a genuine resolution of the crisis includes:

- land redistribution
- transitional justice
- the implementation of a Marshall Plan for the huge segment of Kenyan youth who have been locked out of Kenya's much vaunted 6% economic growth in the past 5 years
- addressing the crisis of masculinity that has funnelled so many young Kenyan men towards militia activity and gender-based violence, to create a new model of Kenyan manhood based on gainful employment and equal relationships

The extent to which KPTJ threatens what you so aptly term "the abnormal normalcy of elite rule" is clearly demonstrated by the fact that our leaders and spokespeople have been labelled "traitors to their ethnicity", are receiving death threats, and have been warned that they are targets for assassination by the state machinery. They include:

Maina Kiai, Chairman of Kenya National Commission for Human Rights
· Muthoni Wanyeki, Executive Director of Kenya Human Rights Commission
· Haroun Ndubi, human rights lawyer, member of Kenya Domestic Observers Forum
· David Ndii, author of report on electoral irregularities
· Gladwell Otieno, Director of Africa Centre for Open Government
· Ndung'u Wainaina, staff member of National Convention Executive Council
· Njeri Kabeberi, Executive Director of the Centre for Multi-Party Democracy

To join the KPTJ mailing list, send an email to [email][email protected]

Thank you for caring deeply about truth and justice for all of us on this continent. And for holding us writers accountable to our words.

My wish: That every day is Valentine Day

In the midst of the post-election violence plaguing Kenya, Constable Andrew Maoche found the strength to contribute to the mayhem by shooting on January 31, 2008 David Kimutai Too, the newly elected parliamentarian from the Orange Democratic Party (ODM) in Eldoret. Unlike the first killing of an ODM legislator in Nairobi, allegedly by thugs, this was explained as a fight over a woman, a love culture, police even in Tanzania are notoriously known to practice when settling their love woes.

Apparently, the late David Kimutai Too had overpowered Constable Andrew Maoche’s attempts towards winning the love of a female traffic officer, one Eunice Chepkwony, in what is now described as a love triangle (undoubtedly to imply some ill intent on the part of the woman, the object of their sorry advances). While Constable Andrew Maoche is presently behind bars, David Kimutai Too is safely interred, ironically with Ms. Chepkwony who was also shot that fateful morning. I find this whole incident very symbolic and want to use it as the basis for my subject this week: love.

I feel compelled to speak about love for two main reasons. First it is because of the controversy that Valentine Day increasingly causes globally: Only recently Saudi Arabia banned any Valentine celebrations in the Kingdom. I wonder if it is because of religious considerations or a deeper unwillingness to address its significance. I also know that nationally there are raging debates about observing Valentine less so because it has become a money spinning scheme and less so on account of its significance in our human relationships with those we are most intimate with. I ‘zoom’ on love because it is subject, or rather a condition that causes many of us much distress, heartache and heartbreak as soulfully stated by Tina Turner, and thus warrants serious exploration.
Love, this mysterious word, used sparingly after a relationship has been formalized, but abundantly when it is just sparkling and we are still in hot pursuit of that which makes the heart flicker. Love, a word that is used to explain a range of emotions and feelings but at the same time a word that is used to justify a range of actions and indiscretions. Love, a word so potent in effect that it can cure chronic problems and conditions- heath or otherwise- but prove equally fatal.

So what is this condition termed love? In my feminist engagement I have found it more helpful to work from what it is not or at least should not be about, rather than make assumptions or conclusion about what it is. My shemeji (brother in law) once complained to me about how my sister would not listen to him and his wishes. His particular grievance was that she failed to cover herself when going out of the house causing him much anxiety and pain. I must admit such a complaint was beyond any expectation I had and more so considering that this was a man who was educated and had met my sister at college. Careful not to take a position on their relationship and respecting the fact that my sister, much as she is someone’s wife, is also an adult who is free to decide and exercise choices she thinks prudent, I asked him, “How did she dress like when you met her and why is it an issue now?”

I knew that he could not claim otherwise as, although she dressed modestly by common persons’ standard, she was not in the habit of covering as has recently become fashionable. In truth, I am at loss at people who meet others in particular circumstances and then feel that their love interest needs to magically transform once they pair with them, to fit the image he or she had of them. Thus, you will hear many women claim defiantly, “I will change him, you will see”. Likewise, you will hear men boast, “If you are my girl/wife you would not …” The audacity by which such demands or claims are made cannot, and should not, be remotely associated or interpreted as motivated by love. Doing so is not only misguided but selfish.

Listening to my shemeji make such demands so early in the relationship nudged me to facilitate a soul searching encounter where I helped him assess what he envisions from the relationship, a vision that would not only be about what his expectations are but also about what her expectations are. For example although her parents went through great pain to educate her in the hope that she would assist in educating her younger siblings, she was now a home-bound wife dependent on his mercy for “spare change” he would periodically give to her, and which she would pass on to her retired parents. But unlike him, she was not complaining perhaps being deeply in love wanted to please her habibi/hababi.
My philosophy, which I shared with him, was to love freely without expectation, condition or obligation (in the sense of compulsion or feeling the other owes you a debt). Love is not just about the butterflies and the giggly feeling we have when we remember the name and the face that makes us glow inside and sing off-key without a care; it is also about tolerating and even respecting the individual traits that make the other so attractive and ultimately delightful to us. Surely, love should not primarily be about changing another to your image: If you want an image of yourself, by all means go and clone yourself! But if it is another that you love, then you have to be willing to accept their imperfections and their differences- not just physical but also intellectual- as being integral to their identity just as it is integral to the soundness of the relationship. You love another for whom they are and for what they make you to be (which hopefully is empowering and happy) and achieve. Perhaps more of us need to appreciate that if love is about giving then it is also about receiving, not just taking.

This said, I should not be understood to preach that couples should not be in the habit of negotiating a relationship. Or that you take any bull--- on the pretext of applying Salma’s philosophy such that you end up like Mary J Blige in ‘Not going to cry’! La hasha. I believe that healthy (not necessarily long lasting) relationships are negotiated and not left to chance. It does not matter that you are dangerously attracted to another. It is important that you and the other must have minimums upon which you build your relationship. These minimums act as the core values of sorts which, I think, are indispensable to building trust and respect in the relationship. Unfortunately, may of us don’t want to waste valuable lust time on these basics. Others fear that establishing them may be interpreted as being too difficult, too choosy, too demanding or too untrusting in the powers of love. After all love leaves us powerless, helpless, defenseless and all traits that signal our unwillingness to take responsibility for such an important aspect not only of our romantic selves but also of our ability to experience life to its richest.

I strongly beg to differ dominant and skewed notions of what ‘love is’ and do so on the basis of accumulated experience of examining the foundation building romantic, and even platonic, relationships I see around me. It is not that love should not or could not have a potential for reward. Rather, the wisdom of love should make us realize that just as I give to a relationship, freely and in appreciation of what my other deserves from me (in recognition to what they mean to me), the only expectation I have is –given that the basis of our relationship is healthy and free- they would seek, in their peculiar way, to appreciate me in a deserving manner.

Thus, it is not about keeping score of how much each has invested (or failed to) in kind but to be confident enough that a strong sense of mutuality reigns in how we express, each in our unique way, love.
Undoubtedly, Constable Maoche’s actions are not unfamiliar to many of us. We witness or hear of them daily. Many of us think kulazimisha (force, compel or hold at ransom) is to love. Just as some of us are busy trying to change another soul to fit an image we want, many more are busy trying to meet the expectations of others in who we choose to love. I remember when I was at the Hill a colleague bold enough to present his paper to me, as we called a love declaration or proposal then, reasoned, “Can you imagine, Salma, if I am seen with you!”, a statement that cost him dearly not because of its sincerity but because of what motivated his advance: I was now a prize to be shown-off!

Alas, many relationships remain that- shows for the benefit of others. You won’t leave an abusive partner for fear of what others may think or say. You won’t date someone who makes you feel so good and alive because of what others may think or say because it is not what would be expected of you. And, although you love and accept your partner as they are, you may feel compelled to pressure them into changing to fit the expectations of others e.g. your parents or friends or Lord forbid, your boss... We thus enter into relationships full of show and pretense of who we are, scared to show and be who we really are. Then you wonder why you wake up one day and ask yourself- who in the heck is this person sleeping next to me, whose face I am looking into but I can’t seem to see or feel?

Although I write for the romantics and the foolhardy in love, I think this philosophy of love applies to other types of relationships we have with others. My description of love in form, substance and feeling is captured in Chaka Khan’s timeless My funny Valentine. It is a song of few lyrics but with powerful effect. It captures love that is expressed selflessly, with surrender. Ultimately, love is about a freedom that allows one to bask from and in the radiance and energy of another. It is the freedom to find pleasure even in that which others may find amusing without a care in the world. It is appreciating that each one of us, as are our experiences, are unique, aspects that make us whole and endearing to one another. It is about finding oneself in the spirit of another and appreciating that what you reflect in terms of feeling towards the other is in most cases the feeling you have towards yourself.
I share of the priceless sonnets that delight me so much with the hope that those who own the copyright would indulge me in this rare act of chivalry to human kind motivated by a need to advocate for sensible and compassionate romanticism on this Valentine Day:

My funny Valentine, sweet comic Valentine,
You make me smile with my heart
Your looks are laughable, Unphotographable
Yet, you are my favourite work of art
….
Don’t baby, don’t change your hair for me
Not if you care for me
Stay little Valentine, baby stay (undoubtedly remain they way you are)
Each day is Valentine, each day is Valentine’s Day

Therefore, I don’t see why love is allowed to become ugly, violent, cruel, debasing, dispiriting, possessive, consuming and hurtful. Why can’t it instead be liberating and all the synonyms that go with the word i.e. beneficial, healing, energizing, invigorating, therapeutic, cathartic and whatever else that makes us glow and grow when we have been blessed to find and experience it? May I wish you, and those you love, eternal Valentine.

*Salma Mlidi is a political activist.

**Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/347/feb21_01_everythinliteratur... reprints an interview of Nigerian playwright Shehu Sani, whose play, Phantom Crescent, has been condemned for criticizing the application of Shari’a law in Northern Nigeria. In the interview, the author, argues that:

“The fact remains that in democracy, people must have the right to express their opinions. And you cannot hide under the guise of any religious dictates to undermine and subvert the rights of the citizens. I’m a Muslim and I don’t believe we have any spiritual leaders… Now, if you happen to be in political office you have to live up to the responsibility as a political leader who has won an election and has a contract with the people. You don’t have to hide behind religion, using prohibitive laws to disguise yourself while you have not lived up to your obligation. I believe these are issues which we have to clearly separate. And my play is simply to educate, enlighten and to pass a clear message. It is also to inspire people to stand up to the defence of their rights because it is only by doing that that we can safeguard our democracy.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/347/feb21_02_innocentsdeal.gifInnocent Chia revisits ongoing attempts by the Biya regime in Cameroon to eliminate term limits and contends that Cameroonians in the US should be at the forefront of efforts to scuttle Biya’s plans:

“Write to your Congressman or woman about the plan of President Biya and his cohorts to change the constitution for a life mandate... The carnage in Kenya can be replicated in Cameroon if the world, led by the U.S ant its leaders, fails in reading the Red Flag warnings that such wanton manipulation of the people and the Constitution represents. About 40% of Cameroon's budget comes from America! You may recall that President Bush recently axed American aid to Kenya, forcing that other dictator to abdicate his unilateralism and to begin discussions on a joint government with the opposition. It is therefore imperative that Cameroonians in the United States fill the in-boxes of the representatives with mail about the impending doom facing Cameroon. Do not doubt the power of a single mail.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/347/feb21_03_akin.gifAkin is outraged by the exorbitant allowances that Nigerian legislators receive:

“…it is interesting that they are concerned about such minutiae as their wardrobe … In a throwback to the colonial days of the District Officer they would have domestic staff that would include a steward, a cook, a housekeeper and a gardener.

They also get paid for being on recess and we can assume there are two recesses in a legislative year and we also pay for their newspapers.

I know not of any job anywhere that offers this kind of largesse, ordinary people are usually supposed to pay for all these things out of their basic salaries.

It would be different if the legislators really get down to doing stuff that helps build Nigeria but with them fed and fattened to the extent that they would not be able to get out of their opulent furniture to walk through the widest doors on earth, this would be gravy-train par excellence and it grates.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/347/feb21_04_madgenius.gifhttp://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/347/feb21_05_kenyaimagine.gifWriting on [...]
The US is concerned about the security ramifications in the Greater Horn of Africa which it has been trying to hold together. A quick look at the map of Eastern Africa gives America little solace. Somalia is in anarchy with a multitude of warlords and radical Islamists, Sudan is involved in the Darfur war and Ethiopia is near war with Eritrea, which the US accuses of sponsoring terrorism. Between the grim sketches is Kenya, America's hope in the region which is now teetering on the verge of instability.
[...]
Thus, security cooperation especially anti-terrorism measures has for long been an important aspect of Kenya-U.S. relations, underscored by airbase and port access. Despite the current political disagreements between the US and Kibaki government, the safety measures of this bond will endure.

That is why the US thus will not stand and watch as its most frontline state in the region disintegrates and is impatient to get any deal through which will guarantee stability. It is worth nothing that its voice has radically shifted from the election being irregular to its international interest of security.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/347/feb21_06_dibussi.gif[email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/