THE SERIOUSNESS OF MALAWI'S 2009 GENERAL ELECTIONS

Lets face the reality

By: Peter Qeko Jere

A quick analysis into the 2009 Parliamentary and Presidential elections in Malawi shows that these elections are very crucial in the life of the country. These elections are very important because the results there will determine the social, political, economic and spiritual destiny of the Church and entire Christian body in Malawi. Thouhg some may not like to hear this but it is an absolute truth as far as these coming elections are concerned. We have therefore put down some few points to show and demonstrate how serious these elections are to Malawians.

Firstly is that the 2009 General Elections will be about Malawian Christians response to the question of whether there are ready and willing to be ruled by a Moslem president for the second time. It is a fact that Christians who are 80% in the country have a larger voice or say in determining the political destiny of anyone who would want to rule the country which at the same time brings religion into the power of Christianity in Malawi. What we mean is that any politician who wants to rule Malawi can not avoid the church because it is in majority and controls the destiny of the country and that of any presidential aspirant. Thus next year’ s elections are about whether Catholics, Presbyterians (Livingstonia, Nkhoma and Blantyre CCAPs), SDA, Baptists, Assemblies of God, Living Waters, Calvary Family and all charismatic and Pentecostal churches are ready to be ruled by a Moslem president for the second time. Some would get angry as to why we are bringing this issue into the picture now because they don’t want people to talk about real issues in Malawi’s politics. They may as well rebel us religious confusionists or call us any name suitable for them but the truth on the ground in Malawi remain that next year’s elections are so much crucial in the live of Malawian Christians because the results will affect the entire destiny of individual Christians and the church. What we mean also is that these elections will decide the destiny of the church in terms of propagation of the gospel because things can’t and will not be the same in situation where a president is a Moslem as we witness the last decade of UDF rule. We don’t have to pretend but become so much real and face reality here because 2009 election is about the destiny of the church and individual Christian whether we like it or not.

We argue this because it was during that troubled and trying time when we had a Moslem President (1994-2004) that Malawians lost Bible Knowledge as a course for student to pursue. We have in memory how the Catholic Bishops and the clergy fraternity tried and worked so much hard to save bible knowledge that hour. This course which some of us took during our old secondary school days has been diluted and its not the same again and will also not be the same anymore. We need to understand and not pretend that in any situation what matters in the kind of president you have in a country because he is the one who is at the heart of any policy. The most worrisome and threatening thing in their campaigns today is that Bakili Muluzi and his entire team are not saying anything regarding what they will do with existing policies in Education, Religion and others. They need to come to the open and tell the nation what they have and what they plan to do and not surprise us as they did when they were removing the bible from its rightful place in the syllabus. We are skeptical because if he comes again he will end up completely removing the bible in schools. Since 80% of Malawians are Christians, what is needed is bible knowledge and not religious and moral education. Removing and playing games with bible knowledge as Muluzi and his government did was stepping on the foot of the Malawi Church and it’s from such actions that the church can not be comfortable to hear of his coming back into politics. Therefore, the church and church leaders should realize that next years elections are not just like the other elections they have been having in Malawi because these ones are crucial in the life of the Malawi church.

Secondly the 2009 elections are about the decision that Malawians will have to make in order to protect the economic destiny of the country from collapsing again. That vote will be crucial because it will have the power to decide whether Malawians are ready to have their economy flashed into the toilet again? Malawians are aware and have vivid memories of how the economy was quickly flashed into a deep toilet the past ten years of UDF rule. The economy that Dr. Banda left was messed up and ordinary Malawians became poor faster than they could realise. There was no food at all and this was terrible and every family was affected. For some of us who have relatives in our villages, life was never easy because even if you wanted maize, you couldn’t get any because we heard that it was sold to Kenya. That difficult time, people left their villages so that they should die in town with their relatives. The idea was that it was better to go to town and eat whatever little those in towns were eating to survive. At the same time, the national riches were being consumed by the few elite mainly those close the President. They became richer faster than never before and there was no one to question the source of their income. They became millionaires and billionaires and the poor Malawians continued to live in poverty and misery. Now that we have our economy restored and we have food again, next year’s election will be so crucial because it will be about protecting that which Malawian have and are enjoying at the moment.

Thirdly the election is about the impact of religion and tribalism in the country’s politics. There are some few indicators that shows that in Malawi religion and tribalism plays a huge role in the political decision that people can make. Some people make decision based on their religious beliefs and others its because of both religion and the tribe they come from. For instance, a critical analysis of Bakili Muluzi and those who follows him, reveals that they do so because of their religion and tribal affiliation. This is clear because the UDF catchments areas of Machinga and Mangochi are full of people whose key influence is religion and tribalism. They follow him not because he is a great man with great idea but because he is someone from their religion and also because they relate with him very well in terms of their tribal background. This is what we may called blind politics where key issues and ideology are not issues at all but religion and tribal background. It is worse because leaders like Bakili Muluzi know that the support they get from their catchment’s areas is not because of their political brilliancy but because of their religious and tribal affiliation. This is the way how politicians abuses the tribal and ethnic divisions which creates resentments from other quarters. Like wise John Tembo, has some support in the central region not because he is great politicians but because he is a home boy from among the chewa people. Therefore next year’s elections will show us which part of the country practice tribal politics.

Finally, this election is crucial in Malawi because for the first time MPs will the severely punished by the power of the vote because of playing games with the budget. It has become so much clear that some MPs openly advocate for the implementation of section 65 over the budget and the good thing is that ordinary Malawians, who have the destiny of these politicians in their hands, are aware of everything they are doing and they are waiting for the right time and right moment to have them punished. As we pointed somewhere else, section 65 has nothing to do with the poor people in our villages and these are two different thing and MPs don’t have to used this as an issue to the point of refusing to have the budget passed. Malawians MPs mainly those from opposition will be in for a rough ride because they have not done enough to develop their constituencies and have ended up enriching themselves and at the same time they refuse the have the budget passed something which is there to help the poor.

WHY CLERGY CAN'T SUCCEED IN MEDIATING PEACE TALKS IN MALAWI

BY: Peter Qeko Jere

In Malawi political economy, the church has been instrumental to help bring about change in the country. From time in memorial the church has been a the forefront helping in the struggle for change. We don’t have to remind you that it was the church in the late 1800s which saved the southern part of Malawi (then Nyasaland) from the Portuguese occupation. What we mean is that if it was not for the church, Blantyre and the entire shire valley could have been part of Mozambique today. But it took the church of Christ in Malawi to fight this war and save the situation. It was also the church which played a strategic role in the fight against colonialism in the country. It was the church again which helped a lot in the fight against Dr. Banda and bring about democracy in the country. In Malawi there is the unwritten law which states that you don’t talk of the birth of multiparty democracy without mentioning the church. We don’t have to forget the Roman Catholic’s Pastoral letter which revolutionize the country.
Due to the history and work the church has done in the past, Malawians have lived to trust that in times of any conflict, the church is the only institution to consult. It is in this vain that even in the madness in parliament over section 65 and the budget, politicians remembered that the best way forward to the issue was to involve the church leaders. Politicians realized that they not capable of bringing peace amongst each other because they don’t have that peace in the first place hence they called the clerics to mediate the political impasse. Many unfortunate things took place in the August house such that some wanted the house adjourned and give the chance to the peace talks.
While church leaders’ responsibility in our society is unique and appreciated, there are some few things that we want to bring to the attention of everybody so that you should know the exact position of the church in Malawi.
The first thing is that in Malawi, the church is badly positioned and can not be effective in mediation. The Malawi church need divine medication healing. There are issues in within the church body that need to be solved. Such issues include tribalism, favouritism, corruption and others. We have interchurch conflict between Livingstonia and Nkhoma Synod where this time around Livingstonia has penetrated part of the Central region. There are church internal leadership conflicts where leaders have taken each other to court and particularly in the Anglican, PIM and SDA. Church leaders have resolved to use the court to solve their issues since they fail to agree on one thing or the other. Also there are allegations of church leaders in the Blantyre Synod who pocketed some money from Bakili Muluzi, who is also a Muslim, with an aim of promoting him in within the Synod. This has shocked the entire Christian fraternity that church leaders can go this far and they ask that if the leaders are doing this then what about an ordinary member of the church? Unfortunately leaders have become instruments that politicians have targeted to manipulate and used in propagating their agendas.
The second thing is that the church in Malawi need to put its house in order first before it begins to get involved in mediating peace at the national level. This is because the church is not qualified to handle national issues this time around because its house is not in order. How can the church leadership be instrument of peace and unity when they themselves do not have the peace and can live in unity? How will they prescribe peace and unity to politicians when they don’t know the definition of peace and unity? Peace making is for those who stay and live in peace. You only give that which you have and you cant give something which you don’t have.
To our view, this team of religious leaders involved in the so called peace talks, should have convened to help solve all religious issues in the country. They should convene to help solve issues in the Anglican Church, the PIM, the SDA, the Nkhoma/Livingstonia Synod, Blantyre Synod corruption saga and others. Church leaders should help each other in unifying the broken churches so that they can be effective in peace making at a national level. Church leaders should be there for each other when the things are bad. Its not proper for leaders to convene with an aim of solving issues at a national level when hot and burning issues are destroying the church. Such meetings should be made to help solve church problems first before national issues are sorted out.
Thirdly is that the Church in Malawi should realize that mediating unity and peace talks is not just about sitting down and telling people what the bible say about unity and peace. They should know that this process to a large extend is about demonstrating what you have to those in conflict. This is about revealing the peace strategies that have sustained the church in years and ask politicians to emulate from the church. This is about giving out that which they live daily. Now it becomes a problem when church leaders’ lives are in a mess because many times ordinary people are too observant and they know the kind of life church leaders live and if they can be trusted. As earlier said here, you only give that which you have. If the church leaders have too much conflicts in within themselves, they can not be effective in any mediation talk.

ECONOMIC ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE MAIN ISSUE

BY: Peter Qeko Jere.

The common tradition all over the world is that when you leave office, auditors come to do their work on you and produce the audited report where they indicate if at all there are some money or office items missing. This is done so that anyone coming to take over should not be in trouble and be punished because of your sins or misdeeds. Audited reports have to be produced and clear your name so as to safeguard your integrity. In here I want to show and argue that something need to be done in terms of auditing all the ten years of Bakili Muluzi’s rule so that Malawians should be aware on how Muluzi used tax payers money and also how donor monies were used. We share this notion because we believe that just as Managers, Directors and others produce audited reports of their work before they leave office, those in high political offices too need to do the same.

We all are aware that in 1994 Bakili Muluzi took over from Kamuzu Banda to become the first President of the land in a multiparty democracy in Malawi. Dr. Banda who was a very old man this time around moved from Sanjika to Mudi house in Blantyre. While at Mudi, Banda though old, went through a very difficult time in the hands of the UDF government who terrorized him as they wanted him to account for all his three decades rule in Malawi. This was the most tiring time for the old man and we can as well say that he died a sad man and no wonder that some of the sickness he suffered had to do with the way he was treated in his old age. We should not forget that the late Dr. Banda was told to appear in the court of law and was saved by the MCP women who protested and vowed that they will do everything under their power to protect their nkhoswe NO. 1. All Kamuzu property was investigated including his Bank transaction in UK and all this left Kamuzu a very sad man in his old age. We should not forget that this time Kamuzu was over 95 years and if anything he needed 100% support from government and not the kind of torture he went through. Infact it unMalawian to mistreat someone who is old and in the 90s.

While Kamuzu was investigated and brought to the court of law after the 1994 elections, it is surprising and shocking that the same measure used on Kamuzu is not applied on Muluzi. Just as kamuzu was asked to give account of all his three decades rule, Muluzi is suppose to give an account of how he rule the country.

While Kamuzu was questioned and had his property scrutinized and his accounts in UK investigated, Muluzi is left free and nobody is doing anything because by now we could have been having a report on how Muluzi became a Billionaire within his ten years of rule. Malawians need to know how much is Muluzi having in his oversea banks and assets? Then how did he manage to buy properties (if any) overseas and where did he get the money from. Now if he has any oversea properties then when did he acquire them? Was it after or before he became president in 1994? Malawians have no problem with what he had before 1994 because we all know how much Muluzi had and there are records of this. However the interest for every Malawians is on anything that he acquired after 1994 when he was sworn in as the president of the country. From the day of his inauguration, everything he began to acquire became something of interest to Malawians because he was the president of the country. If it’s the case of gifts in monitory form from friends and donors, all this becomes a Government Issue and Malawian issue because when you become a head of state, people come with gifts to you as the president something they couldn’t do when you were just an ordinary citizen. The Chiluba UK judgment could as well be applied in this scenario because Chiluba also become a Billionaire within his ten years of rule in Zambia and the UK judge made it clear as regard to the gifts and other monies that Chiluba received as gifts. The question is where do you draw line when receiving gifts when you are a head of state?

Malawians employed Muluzi to rule for ten years and we have the right to know how he used the money in the country. We need to know exact figures as to how much was in government coffer when he got in and how much donor money government received. Also how much gifts and donations in terms of money did he received because all what he received when he was the president of the country came because he was the head of state otherwise nobody could have given him anything if he was an ordinary citizen. Therefore any money that he came from outside as gifts automatically belongs to government because they were giving it to him as a head of state. Therefore Malawians need to know how much of the foreign money came as gifts from overseas and from Africa and where is this money now? The only money we know is the US 12 million which is about K1.4 billion and nobody seem to know where the other money went. If there is this K1.4 billion Kwacha which came as gifts to Malawi then there should be more that is not counted for.

What about Physical assets? How many houses did Muluzi had before he became president? And how many did he acquire after he become president and how did the process like? Did they all went through a normal process or shot cuts were used?

We could have been having reports on where and how he acquired the extra millions and billions he has. We could have been having quantitive figure to explain his source of income that enabled him to amuse massive chuma like this. We believe that if Kamuzu was questioned and investigated on how he acquired his chuma, Muluzi could not have been left free but that he could have given an audited report on how he administered this country. He is not immune to investigation because he has to explain to the nation that employed him to rule for ten years. He is supposed to show that he is innocent and not be defensive as if he already knows that there are problems as to how he acquired some of the millions he has. Muluzi should know that Kamuzu went through the same process and that he also has to be investigated so that the nation can know how he acquired all the things he has.

Its interesting that injunction was filed so that he should not be questioned or investigated. What is the meaning of all this now? To our view, if Muluzi was a clean man and if he knows that he acquired all his millions and Billions in a clean way, he could not have gone to the courts for injunctions and other things. We believe he could have allowed the whole process go smoothly without any problems. He could have remained a man enough with that piece of mind and with a sober heart. But the frequent courts visit and the many lawyers he puts in place automatically shows that something is wrong somewhere and it creates suspicions in the lives of many. If Kamuzu allowed the rule of law do its work even though he was old and helpless, Muluzi is suppose to freely allow those who would want to investigate him do their job so that he clear his name. How will Malawians trust him again with their money and government??

MORGAN TSVANGIRAI RUNOFF WITHDRAWAL A DISASTER STORY

By: Peter Qeko Jere

The Movement for Democratic Change’s President Morgan Tsvangirai announced days ago that he has withdrawn from the Presidential runoff. He said that his party can not contest the election in a situation where MDC members are bitten and chased away from their homes so that they should not vote. There has been mixed reaction as to the timing of the withdrawal and as to what will happen to the election and a way forward for the country. Some mainly the western media houses have condemned and blamed Zanu PF for the violence and others have even gone to the point of saying that Zanu PF is committing crime against humanity which is arguable depending on the context one is operating from. Some have asked for the implementation of the Kenyan model into Zimbabwe political situation and they see this as the only hope for the country.

After analyzing and critically looking into the whole situation that led to the current political mess in Zimbabwe, we have the following key points for your attention.

To begin with, we recognize that the Zimbabwe issue is complex and no-one can easily solve it. The problem is historical, political, economical, social and involves a number of stakeholders. We also do not support the violence taking place which is making ordinary people’s life difficult

However one of the key formula to solve the problem was through the runoff which Tsvangirai has withdrawn due to the reason given in the various media houses world wide. Now the question could be is it wise to withdraw at the eleventh hour? Who was behind the decision that he should withdraw? What will be the impact of this withdrawal on the peace process and also will this withdrawal solve the problem? In response to this, we strongly feel that it is a mistake and suicidal and politically dangerous to withdraw in the midst of the struggle. The huge mistake any one can do in battle is to withdraw in the midst of fighting. We believe that this was part of the struggle for change and withdrawing is not a solution but its something which has retarded the process. Whoever gave the MDC this piece of advice has messed up the struggle because the momentum has been crashed and that it will not be so much easy for them to take off again. This withdrawal is suicidal because like any struggle, blood has to be shed. So people need to understand that in life there are principles that guide events and in case of the struggle, the key principle is that for victory to be born, blood has to be shed. This is the pattern of things biblically and through out history.

For instance blood was shed during the struggle against colonialism and people died. In the early 1990, the wind of change multiparty democratic change which blew across Africa led to the death of many people. The key principle in the struggle is that blood has to be shed if peace and victory has to come. In the bible it is very clear that there is no salvation without the shedding of blood and of course Jesus Christ died and sacrifice his own life for the sake of humanity. To shed blood in the struggle is to sacrifice for the future of your children and your great grand children and not for yourself. In the book of Exodus we see that its through the blood that Israelites were saved from the angel of death when he passed by their home. Without the shedding of blood there is no salvation and in other word, blood of those who die in the struggle is the fuel for the liberation of the oppressed.

Now the argument that Tsvangirani withdrew because many of his people are being killed is to some of us pathetic and directionless because this has highjacked the democratic struggle for Zimbabwe. The problem is that those who advice them have no knowledge and do not know key principle that guides liberation and freedom. Democratic freedom is expensive and does not come on a silver platter. To us Tsvangirai who is the movement leader need to be the first person to know that in the struggle blood is shed and people die. He needs to know that the key principle to any struggle and liberation is that you don’t separate salvation from the blood. He should know that as a leader, he should be at the battle frontline and not in embassy hiding. A liberation leader and human rights activists does not fear death or even hid but stay with the people and suffer with them.

Soon after the election, Tsvangirai was at large outside the country and was not suffering with the people. A great liberation leader is the one who suffer and cry with the people and he leads them as a great shepherd. Tsvangirai was not with the people but that he abandon them and they suffered alone. He was in Johannesburg and traveling across Africa to mount up support while his people were alone without a leader. In the struggle you don’t leave your people alone. As if this was not enough, Tsvangirai has pulled his party out of the contest and we are also that he is gone into hiding in the Dutch embassy while his people are suffering as it is been alleged. It is shameful and discouraging that a leader who was suppose to be at the frontline leading the struggle has gone into hiding. Now if he is in hiding what about his followers? To whom will they cry to or go for protection? Leaders like Tsvangirai need to know that it is not good to hid and leave your people defenceless.

Hiding in the European embassy makes things even worse for him because it is proving his opponent right that he is being supported by Europeans. Why didn’t he seek refuge in the Botswana embassy or any other African embassy so as to make things easy for him and the whole democratic struggle? It has to be mentioned also that in the struggle only those leaders who use their brains and think, survive and come out victoriously. Those who cant think always die on the way before the victory is attained because to be in a struggle is to put brains at work. Brains have to be at work because the struggle is about planning and strategizing so that you outmaneuver the enemy. If the leader has no capacity to think and use his brains, he will always trust any advice that comes his way without even having a thorough scrutiny of it. A leader doesn’t just take advice anyhow but spend time scrutinizing every piece of it.

The pattern of events after the election shows that Tsvangirai need to put himself together and take up his rightful position as a leader if he has to be victorious otherwise he will not make it. If he never realizes that his position in this struggle is the frontline then Zimbabweans should look for someone who shall accept to face the sound of gun and sacrifice his or her life for salvation of many. In this democratic struggle, the three major blunders are enough to make zealous and patriotic people loose trust in their leader when he hid and not suffer or stay hungry with them.

Also it should be noted that Africans always need a leader of the God Father or a hero type character. Tsvangirai as a leader need to be a man of focus and know where he is taking his people to. He also should know that in the process not everyone will reach the finishing line because the principle guiding the liberation states that in the struggle blood is shed and lives are lost.

One of the key issue as regard to Tsvangirai’s withdrawal is that this should pave way to the negotiations and creation of the government of national unity as was the case in Kenya when Odinga and Kibaki were brought together into dialogue. For those who share this notion however needs to think a big time because for some of us, we wonder as to how possible the national unity government can function in Zimbabwe. We feel it is wrong and a mistake to use the Kenyan model because Kenya and Zimbabwe are very different countries with very different liberation history. Also we need to point out the Kenyan liberation history did not play a major role during the elections while in Zimbabwe the entire election are closely connected to the war of liberation from Britain. Also the Kenyan liberation struggle from colonialism didn’t involve too much of a gun firing as was the case with the Zimbabwe issue which basically was about the use of a gun. In Zimbabwe, the liberation history deeply involves the army who by and large have huge influence in the way politics functions in the country while in Kenya, the army is basically outside and any idea of the national unity government will have to deal with a number of issues including the army which are part and parcel of the liberation history of the country


Others have argued that SADC, AU, USA, UK and the UN should put pressure on Mugabe so as to force him give in to the foreign demands. Some have gone as far as saying that South Africa should cut off electricity so that they should force Mugabe to give up. As earlier said, the Zimbabwe crisis is so unique and complex in that anyone who want to solve it should divorce him or herself from Europeans because any idea though good but for as long as it comes from Europe or anyone white can not easily be entertained and accommodated. This is because Zimbabwean suffered a lot under the British colonial rule under Ian Smith. It’s in this regard that Tsvangirai seem not to have huge support and is gradually loosing popularity because of aligning himself with Britain. We in this case are of the view that democratic struggle could have been an easy thing if Tsvangirai handled this outside European influence. In addition to this, it is a fallacy to say that SADC can help solve this crisis. SADC as a regional block can not effectively help solve this crisis because these SADC countries have similar land problem where majority of the people do not own land. Land is critical to African people and this is their only identify. It doesn’t make sense for SADC leaders to teach Zimbabweans on how to handle this issue which involves land ownership while these leaders themselves have similar land problems in their backyard. It is a fact that colonialism took away fertile land from black people who were forced to stay in the mountains. What we are witnessing now is the shift of things because it is a fact that many in the SADC region are landless and have no identity as African people. Land is the gold of African people and you cannot be rich in Africa unless you have land. So there a number of issues SADC leaders’ shall have to follow if they are to solve the Zimbabwe issue amicably because its not about politics only but also land.


Having said this, we finally want to point out that those involved in the negotiations should give chance to Zimbabwean themselves to sit down and solve their problem. Zimbabweans are very intelligent and wise people and this situation is too small for them to fail to solve. The solution to this issue is for the western nations to shut up and keep quiet and give space to Zimbabweans to sit down and talk over issues amicably. The problems come in because of USA, UK and other western nations and their media houses that continue to demonize Mugabe. The more they demonise Mugabe the more they unite the Zanu PF and the more they make him strong. The more they suppose Tsvangirai, the more they make things hard and difficult for MDC on the ground. The bad publicity and anti mugabe media makes Mugabe even more strong because Mugabe and Zanu PF have concluded that Tsvangirai is not alone but has USA, UK and all the European power behind him. So we strongly call upon the west to stay out of this issue and allow African people of Zimbabwe solve the problem the Zimbabwe way.

THE MEANING OF LIGITIMATE/ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT AND THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IN AFRICAN POLITICS

By: Peter Qeko Jere

The Zimbabwe 2008 General Elections which included the Presidential runoff has raised two key issues in African politics today. These include the meaning of the people, legitimate and illegitimate government. The first round of voting produced two main contenders to the Presidency because none of them won the outright majority to form government. This means that Tsvangirai and Mugabe were to face each other in the runoff. However soon or later Morgan Tsvangirai pulled his MDC out the contest which gave room for the incumbent to go unopposed. Thus during the presidential runoff, Robert Mugabe won the elections and was sworn in for another term of office. This has left the MDC with no option but to begin to swallow their ego because it was suicidal for Tsvangirai to pull out at the eleventh hour. However even before voting, many western nations condemned the whole process and called it a sham or a scandal. The United Nations also condemned the elections just as the US and the EU. After Mugabe won the runoff, the condemnation went even louder mainly from the US, Britain and the EU who said that they will only recognize government formed by Mr. Tsvangirai and not Mr. Mugabe. To them they still do not believe that things have gone this far.

Here in Africa, our AU heads of states meeting in Cairo didn’t come up with a strong word of condemnation but asked the Zimbabwean politicians to put their house in order amicably. In Sadc, countries like Botswana with its new President, Khama have come out very strongly saying that Mugabe should be stopped from attending Heads of States meetings. The other strong word has come from Raila Odinga in Kenya who possibly sympathizes with Tsvangirai and he is vocal and anti Mugabe. Thabo Mbeki who has been greatly condemned by many with his quiet diplomacy has not been strong on the issue. Many expected Mbeki to strongly condemn Mugabe and they are angry that he has not done that.

In Zimbabwe itself, Mr. Tsvangirai himself calls the whole Mugabe inauguration as a sham and something which is against the will of the people.

Having said this, we want to discuss “who are the true people” in politics because like the Zimbabwe scenario, the Americans, Britain and the EU have argued that the results of the runoff did not reflect the will of the people. In this case who are the people? Who determines and qualifies who to be included in the people? Like the Zimbabwe situation, how do we define the will of the people? Is the will of the people in the opposition or the ruling party? In case where the opposition withdraws, do the the ruling party stops being part of the people? Or are we saying that the will of the people is determined and defined by the participation of the opposition in politics? Then what do you call those who support the ruling party? Are they not part of the people categorically?

Also the results have been categorically called a sham. Now why are the results a sham in the first place? Is it because MDC pulled out? Suppose they didn’t pull out what were they going to be called? Does the description of the results depend on the opposition’s participation for them not to be a sham? What quantitative indicators do you use to determine that the results are a sham or not? At the same time, what could they have been called if it was Zanu PF withdrawing? Would they have called this a sham or what could it have been and not MDC? And who determine that this result is a sham? What qualification should someone have to be able to make this determination? Finally these results are called a sham according to whose standards?

The US, EU and Britain are at pain and have called the Zimbabwe government an illegitimate one meaning that its an illegal administration. Now let’s look at this: if this is an illegitimate government, then who qualifies a government to be legitimate? What criteria and indicators do you use to qualify a government to be legitimate? Who has this power to make a country legitimate? In this case, does a country stop being legitimate because US, EU and Britain says so? What qualifies EU, USA and Britain to declare nations illegitimate or legitimate? Then how do you define the word legitimate or illegitimate in such situation?

A critical analysis of the situation on the ground had enable us to come up with what we feel is the proper definition and understanding of who the people are and also when does government become legitimate or not legitimate.

To begin with, we respect the position taken by western nations and African nations that have strongly condemned the Zimbabwe electoral results. We don’t have a problem with that because we realize people have freedoms and rights these days to express themselves on issues so are nations and their leaders. They can choose to remain silent or speak out depending on the political beliefs of their leaders. However we want to share something on the questions raised about how do we define the will of the people? As from western leaders’ comments on the issue, it is clear that the will of the people rests in the opposition hence even though Mugabe has been inaugurated for another term of office, they say they will only work with government that Mr. Tsvangirai will form. Now the question is when will this be and how will this be since a sitting president has been inaugurated already for another term of office? In this regard we feel the western nations approach to the issue of the will of the people is misleading because this can not only rest in the opposition. Like Zimbabwe, many African countries have the ruling party and those in opposition and it’s a terrible mistake to equate the people with only the opposition leaving out the other sector of society from the ruling party. So its scholarly wrong to limit the definition of the will of he people to the voice of the opposition. The question could be if the will of the people is limited and only rests in the opposition then what do you call the voice that comes from the ruling party? Now do those from the ruling party stop being people when the opposition withdraws from the contest such that their voice cannot be considered as the will of the people? We feel that this understanding propagated by western politicians is wrong because there is more to the will of the people than limiting it to the voice of the opposition only. Also that its wrong to say that they will of the people is in the opposition because there is enough evidence to show that in African politics today, many opposition parties have no ideology but that they only exist to oppose everything that comes from the ruling party even if government has such programs that are geared to benefits their own people in the constituencies.

As regard the element of calling the results a sham, this raises so many questions mainly when you have a very objective view to it. It is because this voice has by and large being influenced by external forces. The USA, EU and Britain has called the results a sham followed by all the nations that get economic support from them. At the same time, majority of the nations that belonged to the opposing side during the cold war, seem not to be so much interested in what the US, EU and Britain are advocating. In essence, the calling of these results a sham brings us back to the cold war and has divided African countries. So if we may ask, whose standards determine that the results are a sham or not? Should it the USA, EU or Britain? Are we saying that all African countries don’t have standards of their own? Should we as African people wait until the EU, US and Britain make a determination for the results to be fair? Is this in other way not a different version of colonialism that Western countries should have a say in the administration of internal issues affecting African countries? We strongly feel that though the Zimbabwe issue has gone overboard, it should still be left in the hands of Zimbabweans to sit down and solve it. This is because there is more to the Zimbabwe issue that western politician who many of them are too young to understand the histories of African countries. In fact majority of the western political leaders didn’t study African political history and they have no idea whatsoever to clearly understand the dynamics and ideals of African politics today. You can not understand and know the complex of African politics unless you know the histories of African colonialism and the liberation process. So the definition of whether the results in Zimbabwe are a sham or not has to a larger extent depends on what the Zimbabwean themselves say about it based on social, political and economic history of their country. It has to be the people of Zimbabwe because Zimbabwe belongs to the African Zimbabwean and not to the US, EU and Britain. What we mean is that this piece of land called Zimbabwe belongs to both the MDC and Zanu PF and they are the key players who have to come up with a final say as to what they think is good for their country and for their destiny.

Now on the question of illegitimate or legitimate government there are many questions again that need clarification. The US, EU, Britain and their economic partners, have by and large called the Zimbabwe government illegitimate one. In other ways they do not recognize it and they have nothing to do with it. So the question is what qualifies the USA, EU, Britain and their economic partners to categorically call a country illegitimate? Whose standards do they use to determine that the government is illegitimate or not? The irony is that the media says that the US will put sanction on all countries that are in close ties with Zimbabwe as a way of pushing them to pressure Robert Mugabe. Now is this morally good? Since when has it become a sin or criminal for nations to be in good terms? Should the US determine and pin point which country we as African should befriend? Should our friendship in Africa be controlled in Washington? We think things have gone overboard and there is too much sign of immaturity here because African sovereign states should be left alone to decide which nation to befriend based on what they feel is good for them as African people. Therefore the USA, EU and Britain should know that this is the 21st Centuary where African countries know what I good for them as African people. They should know that they do not have any constitutional right to declare that a particular country in Africa is illegitimate or legitimate unless they are part of the voting process. Those who take part in the voting process are the ones who declare that a system or country is illegitimate or not. That the legitimate of any country is in the power of the vote. That small vote we cast during the election has the power to declare a country legitimate or not. So spectators or observer’s job is to monitor and they cant go beyond that.

WHY AM A PROUD MALAWIAN TODAY

By: Peter Qeko Jere

As of late many people have questioned why I write a lot on issues affecting Malawi as if am a student of political science or if am planning to join politics in future. They question why Malawi has become so special to me this time around and why should it be today and not the previous time when I was here at the University of Fort Hare doing my Masters degree. Just a while ago someone emailed from the US and she is wondering why I write apologetically about Malawi. The shift around me is very clear for everybody to see and witness. I have therefore decided to respond to the many questions people have about my current position through this network.

To begin with, it is true that I spent some of my free time thinking and writing some things about Malawi. I have been compelled to do this because of the negative journalism out there against my country. There are some few confused and unprincipled minds whose main agenda is to write negative stories about this great land. They claim to be citizens of this great nation but surprisingly they continue to do negative journalism where the only thing they know best is to write against the land of my birth. As a patriotic citizen of the land, I have an obligation to defend my country from any form of negative journalism. There is this unwritten natural law which forces me to defend my country from such negative journalism out there.

How can they call claim to be true Malawians when they spend sleepless time planning to tarnish the good image of my motherland? Now how true Malawian are they, if they plan to write negative stories against their own land. For some of us, we don’t have any other home apart from Malawi and this is the land of our birth. That is why we take up the pen to fight back if anyone writes negatively against our only home in the world. We expect citizen of the land to do patriotic journalism where they have obligation to promote and not destroy the good image of the country. This is where you do everything under your power to protect and promote that which you have. The only thing that every citizen of this great nation have is Malawi.

I for one, Malawi is my very being and you don’t separate me from this rich heritage because this also represents the land, mountain, valleys, rivers, beautiful plains and our great lake. I am aware of my history and heritage which is so much rich and its all attached to this great land. So when I write, its something that comes from my heart not my head, as a way of protecting and promoting the land of my birth.

Secondly I write positively about Malawi because this time around we are so much privileged to have the Head of State, His Excellency Dr. Bingu Wa Muthalika who passed through the corridors of several Universities in the world attaining both undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications. What I mean is that in Malawi we have the President who is educated. He has a Bachelor of Commerce, Masters Degree and a PhD in Developmental Economics and he is also a writer and has several publications behind his name.

One of his masterpiece is the book called, ‘One Africa one Destiny” published by Sapes Trust in 1995 where in chapter 3 (Muthalika 1995:60-90) he deals with the definition and issues of democracy in relation to the will of the people. I think you all need to read this book and this chapter if you are to understand democracy as African people. I think politicians also need to read this so that they get a clear understanding of what the will of the people is all about.

In fact my President has written some more books related to his field of study (Developmental economic) like the following: Toward multinational economic co-operation in Africa (by Praeger 1972); The Vibrant Circle of growth; A Case study on Regionalism in Africa in Regional integration and the New International Economic order (UNITAR-CEESTEM-Perganom Press 1981); Transnational Corporation and Technical Cooperation Among Developing Countries in The Challenges of South-South Co-operation (RCCDC-Westview Press 1983); Regional and Sub-regional Integration in Africa: Perspectives, Problematiques and Prospects (Research and Information System for the Non-Aligned and other Developing Countries/ EL Colegio de Mexico 1987 (Muthalika 1995).

In additional, our President is not only educated but has also worked in a number of well known international organization like the World Bank, United Nations and for a good number of years he was the General Secretary of PTA now called COMESA. This is the kind of a man you can comfortably associate with mainly when you are an upcoming scholar and a citizen of this great land. Thus I am proud that am a Malawian and a patriotic citizen of the land.

LILLIPUT ARTS AND CRAFTS

ALICE, EASTERN CAPE, SOUTH AFRICA
LOCATION: BELOW STANDARD BANK,
ALICE BRANCH, OPPOSITE SHELL ALICE MOTORS.

Today I want to introduce you to two major items that may sound new and strange to a good number of you out there. These are the small town of Alice where the University of Fort Hare and Lovedale College are located. The town of Alice though small has a big history as far as African liberation and freedom is concern. It was it is in this town where most of the first crop of African Nationalists lived when they were doing their University Education here at Fort Hare. For instance, great African leaders and statesmen like Julius Nyerere, Mandela, Robert Mugabe, Oliver Tambo, Mangasutu Buthelezi, Manoah Chirwa, Orton Chirwa, Masauko Chipembere , Thabo Mbeki and others walked in the streets of this small town. They became great leaders because of what this small town provided for them. So you don’t separate African nationalism and struggle for independence from this town.

Now this town today has a well furnished shop which has many items that could remind you and I as regard our identify as African people and children of the soil, valleys and mountains.

This shop is called LILLIPUT ART AND CRAFTS and it’s located below the Alice Standard Bank, opposite shell Alice Motors. Key items in this shop include Beadwork, glasswork, wool craft. Lillian Nozuko Peter is available Monday to Saturday to have your designs done. Also in this shop, you will find various newspapers for both South African and international; Mail & Guardian, Sun, Job mail, King mercury, Daily Dispatch, Sowetan, Soccer Laduna, Die Burger, Magazines and many stationery for those who are students.

For more details Contact

Mama Sylvia Lillian Nozuko Peter
Phone: 27-406531215 (international dialing) or 0406531215 (local)
Fax : 27-406532754
Cell : 0843861018

LEADERSHIP GROOMING: KEY SOLUTION TO AFRICAN CONFLICTS

By: Peter Qeko Jere

Many have questioned as to why Africa has become a battle field where, lives have been lost and many have gone into exile as political refugees. Some continue to ask what actually is the problem with Africa and what kind of sin did Africa commit that political conflict have become the order of the day. Each time you open your TV, the only thing you hear about Africa is war, bloodshed and political conflicts. Its either Dafour, Somalia, Chad, Central African Republic, Zimbabwe and others. In this brief account I want to show that the major problem in Africa today is the failure by leaders to groom someone to succeed them when their term of office expires. I also want to show that there is peace and tranquility in all countries where are prepared in advance.

To begin with, there is enough evidence to show that many African leaders don’t like prepare a successor in their political parties and government. This is a problem in African politics because many of our leaders the moment they are elected forget that one day they will have to leave office and pave way for a successor. We have political stability in countries where leadership grooming is the order the day. In such countries, there is always a peaceful transition from one leader of both the party and government. For instance, in Botswana, the country is at peace and stable economy because leaders are civilized and know the need to groom and prepare someone who could take over from them. Sir Ketumire Masire groomed Festus Mogae while Mogae groomed Khama who has just taken the reign of power even before the election. It is amazing that Mogae didn’t wait for the final whistle to leave office but he just handed the presidency to his deputy just like that, something that some African leaders can do. In grooming, the Vice President is given enough time to study how the President administers the country and normally it’s a period of ten years. In Mozambique, political transitions were smooth and peaceful from Mondlane, Samora Michael, Chissano and now Geubuza. What we see here is that its only one party which rules the country using the available human resources it has. There is peace and political stability in this country because Chissano didn’t want to rule the country more than necessary but handed the leadership mantle to one of the senior person in the party, someone who could carry the revolution forward. In Tanzania, there has been peaceful political transition at both party and national level from the time of Mwarimu Nyerere, Mwinyi, Mukapa and now Kikwete. The ruling Presidents from Mwalimu, have always been able to groom and prepare someone in within the party whom all of them could trust and support. In South Africa, Mandela handed the leadership mantle to Thabo Mbeki even before the end of his term of office. For five years Mbeki was groomed and prepared to rule the country. In Lesotho, Mokhlekhle groomed the current Prime Minister Mosisili in within the ruling party.

While some African countries Presidents and head of states have succeeded in grooming someone to take over from them, there are some who have see this as a threat to their political destiny. This is because they think that they were born to rule for life. For instance, in Malawi, Dr. Banda never groomed someone to take over both the party and government. Due to it was a problem to have the rightful successor when Banda died and the party disintegrated because both John Tembo and Chakuamba wanted to become the president.

Though is in charge of MCP, it is not clear as to whom he is grooming as the next leader of the party after he retires from politics. Some have argued that just like Banda, John Tembo is not grooming anybody to take over from him because he thinks he will rule MCP for life. This is the same mistake that Banda made something which reduced the political base of the party.

Like Banda, Muluzi after ruling Malawi and his UDF party for ten years also never prepared someone to take over from him. This at the end made him panic politically and many of his great friends left him. At the party level the UDF and Muluzi did not prepare someone to take over from him. We wonder as to why it is so much of a problem in Malawi’s politics to prepare someone to take over power. It seems the life presidency syndrome is still in many of our leaders such that they think they were born to rule for life. As for UDF, imagine Muluzi has been the leader since its formation and its like he is the life president or chairman of party. It seems there are unwritten laws in this party whereby noone could rule and take over the leadership of this party for as long as Muluzi is alive. The party has been bulldozed to the extend of changing its constitution to suit the needs, aspirations and demands of one man which automatically make him the life president and chairman of the party.

In all this, it is very clear that the UDF party has no one to succeed Muluzi which is worrisome because this party is going toward making Muluzi the life president the very same ideology which Malawians fought against in 1992. So failure by our leaders to groom upcoming leaders has led to the current political madness in the country. Malawi political problems to the large extend are caused by our selfish leaders’ who do not want to prepare and groom others to take over power from them.

Just like in Malawi, in Zambia, Kaunda never groomed someone to take over power from him. In the same way, Chiluba was in trouble when he wanted to change the constitution as he had noone to succeed him. During the entire ten years of his rule, Chiluba never thought of grooming someone to take over power from him one day. Thus he even wanted to change the constitution so that he could rule again. Now it is not clear as to who Mwanawasa is grooming as he is in his last term of office. The good thing with Mwanawasa is that he has made is clear to everybody in the party and the nation at large that he will not seek a third term and that he is happy that he is serving the Zambian people and in his last term of office. Also the leadership grooming seems to be a problem in Uganda where we are not sure if Museveni is preparing someone to take over power from him. Like wise in Kenya, Mwai Kibaki who is in his last term of office, need to begin to groom someone to take over power from him in a peaceful transition. The mistake leaders make is that they wait until the eleventh hour to think of who to hand over power to and as a result things goes politically bad. Finally in Zimbabwe, the main cause of the current political situation is the Zanu PF failure to groom someone to lead the party after Bob retires. Now if leadership grooming is not done at the party level, it becomes hard to think of leadership grooming at the national level. Things begin at the party level and flows at the national level. Our leaders should develop the culture of preparing someone to take over power from them in good time at both party and national level. Leaders need to be reminded that opposition parties dies a natural death in countries where the ruling party grooms the next President. In Tanzania and Botswana for example, the ruling party is very every leader who comes in knows that he is there for ten years and prepares someone to rule in advance. This strengthened the party and it remains intact and not shaken. So the only solution to African conflict is leadership shift in terms of party’s preparing the next leader in advance.

THE 2008 ROBERT SOBUKWE MEMORIAL LECTURE: PIERRE BUYOYA AND THE ALUSHA PEACE TREATY

BY: Peter Qeko Jere

On the 30th of May 2008, I was privileged to attend the 4th Robert Sobukwe Memorial Lecture here at the University of Fort Hare where the former President of Burundi, His Excellency Pierre Buyoya was the main Guest Speaker. In his Robert Sobukwe Memorial lecturer, His Excellency Buyoya presents the Arusha Agreement for Peace and Reconciliation in Burundi: Ten Years on the Path Toward Peace

Briefly, the Robert Sobukwe memorial Lecture is a yearly event here at the University of Fort Hare where prominent Sons of Africa are invited to give a lecture to commemorate and celebrate the life and political struggles of Robert Sobukwe who in 1959 founded the Pan African Congress (PAC) in South Africa and was also a graduate of his great University. The tripartite alliance, the Steven Biko Foundation, the Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe Trust and the University of Fort Hare were the main organizer of this function. Present at this memorial lecture were prominent people like the Eastern Cape Premier , the University of Fort Hare Vice Chancellor, Dr Mvuyo Tom who gave the vote of thank, Robert Sobukwe and Steven Biko’s sons, Dini and Nkosinati while the Director of ceremony was Prof. Buthelezi.

In this article, I will briefly comment on the Arusha Peace Treaty and its role in Making Burundi an admirable model in solving tribalism and ethnic conflicts in Africa. Secondly I will say some things that other retired Presidents in Africa need to do so as to emulate the good work Pierre Buyoya is doing across Africa. Finally I will show how Burundi dealt with the problem of ethnicity the kind of steps that can so beneficial to Malawi if emulated from.

As former President Buyoya was presenting his lecture, I sat at the back of the auditorium and paid attention as I listened to every word that he spoke. I was attentive because I realized that this was the same man who came into Malawi years back and I had no opportunity to hear and see him at close range apart from watching on Television. This time the President was right on campus and presenting his lecturer about what he basically did to bring about peace in his country. I admired him because he was doing the exact thing that former head of states need to be performing, help equip young people as they also get prepared to be leaders tomorrow.

To begin with, President Buyoya gave us a brief historical background of Burundi and said that this is a small country in the heart of Africa which boarders Tanzania in the south east, DRC in the west and Rwanda in the north. It is 28,000 square kilometers with 7.5 Million people. Burundi is one of the oldest nations in the Great Lakes region and was once a German colony from 1896 until 1918 before it was given to Belgium until 1 July 1962, when it gained independence. Though there had been some ethnic conflicts in Burundi, it was after the assassination of the President elect, Melchior Ndadaye on 21 October, 1993 that the country descended into a civil war that lasted 12 years. This civil war was basically between the majority Hutu and Tutsis.

As regard the main cause of this civil war, president Buyoya pointed two key major causes of this conflict. These were Bad governance after independence period and politicians abuse of ethnic division. He said that after independence, leaders continued to discriminate base on ethnic background and this was happening in schools, civil service and many other areas. He said the majority Hutus were victim of this discrimination and this helped make ethnic identify more entrenched and rooted in the national consciousness. As Pierre Buyoya mentioned this, I adjusted my chair and looked into my situation at home in Malawi where my people suffered discrimination of all form during both Dr. Banda and Bakili Muluzi’s rule. It killed me inside because I could relate the Burundi discrimination to what my people went through and the pain that people from the northern region of the country have gone through. I quickly remembered 1989 when discrimination came to its climax when all teachers including my uncle were chased from central and southern region and dispatched to their homeland in the north. I realized that many suffered in silence and many have even died in this pain. The only sin and crime they committed was that they come from the north. We don’t have to mention how qualified sons and daughters from the north could not get promotions in the private sector also. During Muluzi’s reign things were even worse because no major developments took place in the north and worse still it was alleged that the money meant for the construction of the road to Chitipa was diverged to the construction of the road in Mangochi or somewhere in the south.

The second Buyoya mentioned that politicians were abusing ethnic division in the country during campaigns. Of course in Malawi we have tribalism and regionalism that politicians have greatly abused. As Pierre Buyoya was speaking, I realized that this happens almost across Africa and has been the major cause of politician conflict. In Malawi politicians take advantage of regionalism since political party formation has been along regional lines. For instance, John Tembo considers the central region as his stronghold among his tribal men, the Chewa people while Muluzi has Machinga, mangochi, part of Balaka and some few districts in the southern region among his Yao people.

President Buyoya also put in place some attempts in trying to solve the ethnic tension and conflict in Burundi. Key to this he said was recognizing the fact that ethnicity was a problem to society’s progress. He also said that in Burundi, they introduce power sharing mechanism in government, civil service based on the fifty-fifty representation between Hutu and Tutsi. He added that they have two vice presidents from different ethnic groups. He said that appointment of Court Judges and others are based on ethnic representation. Looking into this critically, we realize that African governments need to realize and recognize the fact that tribalism and ethnic divisions are real. We need to accept that we face the results of this as a problem in society every day. We don’t have to pretend that societies are at peace when the power of tribalism hits and terrorize some of them on a daily basis. There is tribal resentment in African politics today that many tribes tend to support candidates who belong to their tribe. You can only begin to solve the problem when you accept that it exists.

In Burundi conflict, the Alusha Peace Treaty accommodates all key tribes in the administration of the country as a way of solving the problem. Thus African countries need to emulate the Burundi way of solving ethnic conflict where each tribe is represented at a higher level. In Africa naturally people feel good when one of their sons or daughter is part of the administration of the nation. It’s a proud thing for the entire tribe when they are represented in the administration of the country. At the same time, people automatically resent any administration where they are not represented which at the end creates conflicts. So African political problems are to a larger extend caused by a situation where people see no need of supporting a government when they are not represented at a higher level. Thus a situation where all major appointments are ethnically balanced, tend to unity the country unlike when one group of people, tribe and region or province monopolize the administration of a country.

In this regard, African Union, SADC, UNO, EU and the world at large, should know that the root cause of African problems is ethnicity and tribalism and the only solution to such situation is to follow the Burundi way of solving the situations. AU, SADC, UNO and EU should not rush at condemning African systems but should in the first place identify the key root of the problem and realize that it exist and then begin to solve them. In this vain, the Burundi model could help bring peace in Somalia, Sudan, Chad, Central African Republic, the DRC and Zimbabwe. The Burundi model could help because in all these conflicts, the major cry of the people is that they are not represented in the administration of these countries hence they resolve to take up arms to solve the problem. The key purpose of taking arms is that they should fight so that they at the end directly get involved in the administration of these countries.

ZIMBABWE NEED A CHIHANA

By Peter Qeko Jere

A critical analysis of the Zimbabwe situation today reveals that they need a Chihana type of a pro-democracy campaigner and a human rights activist. Chakufwa Chihana was the only courageous man in Malawi in 1992 who defied all odds but came home to lead the struggle against the autocratic rule of Dr. Banda. Chihana arrived at the airport and didn’t fear death and the prison chains but went forward to give his life as a sacrifice for the freedom of the country. This is the man who shocked Dr. Banda and faced him head-on until Banda open up the country to multiparty democracy. Chihana came to Malawi to directly face the treason law of Dr. Banda and he never left the people alone. He even said that no change can take place from outside the struggle. True change and victory is born from the inside and if there is someone who is man enough to lead, he has to be ready to die and sacrifice his life for others.

In the bible we are told that freedom and change for God’s children in Egypt came because Moses stayed with the people and confronted the regime of the time right there. Moses stayed strong even though his people continued to suffer. He suffered with and stayed strong and was not moved. Infact Moses never asked for any foreign intervention but God used him because he stayed with the people. God stays with the suffering people and he blesses a leader who ministers to such people. The Exodus account shows that blessed is a leader who stays in the frontline leading the suffering and the poor because God mightily uses and ministers to such leader. But when a leader goes into hiding, he becomes useless before God and can not be used by Him anymore. Going into hiding or leaving the suffering alone is closing the chapter for God to use him because God is looking for someone, a leader who can stand between the gap of the suffering people and become a sacrificial lamb to be slaughtered for the salvation of many. Even Jesus Christ in the bible, he describes himself as a good shepherd someone who takes care of the sheep and that is the quality of a great leader, someone who can lead and be with the people. One of the characteristics of a leader is that he has to be a shepherd and normally he stays in the frontline and the sheep follows him. The shepherd is the one who gives direction as to where the sheep should go that day. This is what a leader should do, something which is terribly missing in Tsvangirai. Though the western world is supporting the move to withdraw and even his hiding in the Dutch embassy, the world should know that God hates a leader who leaves his sheep alone. God’s desire is for a leader to lead the suffering people. The world should also know that God moves away from a leader who abandons that suffering and the poor and instead he raises up someone capable to stand between the gap.

We are arguing that Zimbabwe today need the Chihana type of a leader because of what Morgan Tsvangirai has been doing since the election results were announced. He left the people and went to South Africa and was up and down African capitals to mount up pressure against Mugabe. Also he is hiding in the Dutch embassy something which shows that there is a huge problem and element of fear in him. It is so much dangerous when a leader who is supposed to be at the frontline vacates his position and goes into hiding. The question is with whom do you leave the people and where will they go to when are in trouble? The Chihana type of leader stays with the people and don’t care about their lives but surrender it completely as a sacrifice for the liberation of their people. Such leaders stay in the battle frontline until the war is over. This is what Zimbabwe needs this hour around, a leader who will stay with the people, someone who will suffer with them when the going gets tough.

CHURCH MISSED OPPORTUNITY

BY: PETER QEKO JERE,

Early this year the government of Malawi exported maize to help our brothers, sisters and children who are suffering in Zimbabwe. There were mixed reaction to this initiative taken by our government. However though some of us with a sober minds and loving heart, normally have no problem when it comes to doing such noble work helping the needy and we thanked God for what the government did on behalf of all Malawians. This is because majority of those suffering in Zimbabwe belong to the body of Christ and are registered members of various Christian churches. In other words by and large, the government sent maize to even help our fellow Christian brethren something which can not be taken for granted.

While at government level there was such commitment and support, we have not heard anything from the Church of which confesses Jesus Christ in Malawi on this matter. We wonder what the church is doing and when will it begin to help their suffering brothers? When we say that majority of those suffering are Christian we simply mean that they are Catholics, Presbyterians, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Anglican, Methodist, Pentecost’s and various charismatic church members. The Malawi church has sister churches in Zimbabwe hence it may not be right for us as a Malawian church to sit phwii and watch our fellow brethren suffering. If we do this then our Christianity is not that of Christ who still sits on the throne but somebody else.

The situation is Zimbabwe is an invitation letter to all Christian churches that time has come to get into Zimbabwe and help. God can not speak more loud and clear to the Malawian church than in this than in this situation. Behind this situation is the voice of God calling upon all the churches to seriously consider getting involved in helping those who are suffering. Therefore, a great window of evangelism has been open for the church that its about time that it should get into Zimbabwe and become an instrument of hope in the lives of those suffering.

The church in Malawi and its entire leadership need to realize that time has come to begin to act like Jesus Christ who had a holistic approach to ministry. This is because Jesus Christ not only preached the gospel but also spent a good part of his ministry feeding the hungry and healing the sick. The bible is clear that Jesus Christ healed and casted out devils in the lives of many but at the same time, those many thousands could eat the bread and the fish that he multiplied. Christ had compassion when he saw that they were hungry the exact thing that the church need to do. Just like Jesus Christ, the church need to show and demonstrate compassion as their master did. The church need to be available in the zones where people are suffering so that it can become the voice of encouragement in the lives of people.

However we need to realize that the church which confesses Christ need to act like Christ and not otherwise. Some may be saying that their churches are so much involved in such activities and hence it is not necessary to go as far as Zimbabwe to evangelize. In reaction to such arguments, we want to make the following statements: firstly is that the church which crosses the boarders to evangelize gets more blessed from God that the church which concentrates ministry in Jerusalem ministry. This may sound crude and hard to some of you but remains a sober truth as far as the word of God is concern. This is because Cross-boarder ministry demands more prayer, commitment, seriousness, availability and sacrifice. Secondly is that Malawi churches are poor because they don’t have a missionary touch to their evangelism. Of course some may have done this once but failed to sustain them.
Thirdly is that the missionary church can not be compared with the Jerusalem type. Missionary church goes international and has a wider angle from where it proclaims the gospel as compared to a church which focuses on their own territory. Finally is that there is more seriousness to cross boarder ministry than when you are involved in an internal assignment as far as ministry is concern hence we share the notion that there is something that the Malawi church is missing by not getting involved in helping the suffering church in Zimbabwe. Someone may argue that the Malawi church can not get to Zimbabwe because it has not yet finished assisting those in her Jerusalem. To this we may pose a question, if the church is sorting out its Jerusalem this time around then what has it been doing all these years?

This passion to help fellow suffering church connect us to what the Church in Caesarea did by helping their mother church in Jerusalem when there was famine. The bible declares that brethren in Jerusalem were saved from starvation because of the help which came from their colleagues in Caesarea and this was just a small poor church like any of the churches we have in Malawi. Though this church was poor, it managed to put something together to assist those suffering in Jerusalem.

This therefore teaches the Malawi church that though they may claim to be poor, there is still something they can still do to help those who are suffering just as their Caesarea did. Therefore, poverty is not a reason or factor to stop a church from helping and supporting those that are suffering. Having said this, the Malawi church today has to readjust its position as far as mission work is concern because there is more blessings in cross-boarder missionary work and it should not miss this opportunity to reach out..

XENOPHOBIA: REFLECTION AND RESPONSE

BY: Peter Qeko Jere.

Introduction.

The current brutal killings of foreigners in Johannesburg, Cape Town, Durban and some other parts of South Africa has hit headlines across the globe and the world has been taken unaware with this confusing event at this moment in time. The photo of a burning young men with police trying to rescue him from the flames has circulated in all he major media houses and the one question that people ask is, “ why should black South Africans do this to fellow black man? Why should things go this far? What is the problem and the key reason behind all this madness? What does God say about such situation? What should Christian and the church of God do?

In this paper, I want to lay out a theological response to this issue. But before I go any further, I guess it Is vital that I should say some few things about Xenophobia and its implication in South African society today. I will argue my position in relation to the questions that PASM has raised in connection and concern with the entire killings taking place in South Africa.

THE MEANING OF THE WORD-XENOPHOBIA
The world Xenophobia is not an English word but it’s a word which has its deep root and meaning in Greek. This word comes from two major word, xenos and phobos.

Firstly the word “xeno” comes from the Greek word “xenos” which has the connotation of “foreign” or something which is “strange” or “stranger” (if it’s a person).

Secondly the word phobia comes from the Greek word “phobos” which means “fear” or fearing something.

Literally, xenophobia means the stranger or foreign’s fear. This is also defined as the fear of the coming in of some strange ideas or foreign people into a community. This is the fear which the locals have due to the coming in of stranger or someone from another country or tradition. There has to be someone called a stranger or foreign (xenos) which means that he or she is in a place which is not his or his original home. She or he may have come into this new place looking for opportunities, as refugee, aslylum seekers or something. So his or her coming becomes a problem or creates fear (phobos) in the lives of the inhabitants. Locals have this fear because this stranger comes in to invade their space. The locals in the first place are not told in advance about the coming in of this stranger or foreigner. Locals get surprised that when they work up, their neighbour is a new person from across Africa. Locals are not involved in the whole process which leads to the settling down of these foreigners. Now fear (phobos) breaks loose in the locals because they realize that due to limited education and profession experience, they may not be able to compete with their non local experienced Africans.

THE SOUTH AFRICAN EXPERIENCE
After the successful gains of defeating apartheid, it is sad to note that a new wave of segregation and victimization is taking place in society today. After going through five decades of apartheid brutality, one would expect that South Africans would be the first people to exactly know what it means to victimize and abuse someone due to their long painful history. Their history of torture and segregation was not a game but a real thing and many died in the course of fighting for freedom and justice. After 1994 when apartheid was officially buried and wiped off the political line, one would think that the nation was gonna move in the right direction without allowing any should go through pain and torture. But the recent xenophobic attacks on defenseless foreigners in Johannesburg, Cape Town, Durban and other areas across the country, has reveals that something has gone wrong somewhere and somebody didn’t tell somebody something about the negative effective of doing such a barbaric attack on people. This xenophobic experience is interesting to study and watch because it has to a larger extent affected non South Africa blacks as opposed to their whites’ counterparts from overseas. It has become a problem where black people have taken up arms to kill and wipe away those who are not inhabitants of the land.

APARTHEID STRUGGLE AND NON SOUTH AFRICANS ROLE
This xenophobia sentiment has enabled us to look into the role of non South Africans in the fight against apartheid. There is a role that nations and people in Africa did in helping South Africans successfully dismantle apartheid. It was the people outside South Africa who by and large sacrificed their security and decided to be in solidarity with the suffering South Africans. Many of the ANC leaders stayed in exile outside South Africa where some where in Zambia, Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Tanzania to mention but a few. While South Africans were directly fighting the brutal white regime, outside South Africa, black people were in total solidarity helping the suffering South African brothers. In particular nations like Zambia, Zimbabwe and Mozambique have a very special place in the entire anti apartheid revolution because these nations directly suffered from the white man’s brutal attacks for harboring ANC leaders. If it was not for these nations’s sacrificial position in helping fellow South Africans in the struggle, we are not sure if apartheid could have been dismantled with the internal pressure alone. This is the kind of history which has not possibly been effectively communicated to the many young people in South Africa. May be no-one has said anything to them regarding the role that nations outside south Africa played in helping ANC leaders. They have not been told that dismantling of apartheid was not the work of internal pressure alone but the entire world and particularly SADC countries.

This argument does not mean that we should use this thinking to invade every space in South Africa. We also don’t mean to say that we have the right whatsoever to come work or settle in any way we want. But that for those with valid legal reason to stay need to be given space and accommodated. Just as ANC were accommodated outside South Africa, South Africans need to likewise accommodate fellow Africans and not kill them. Just as ANC leaders were given food and shelter outside South Africa, South Africans need to do likewise to African brothers who are going through struggles right now. What could have happened if African countries didn’t welcome and accommodate ANC during the struggle?

RESOURCE COMPETETION AND XENOPHOBIA
The first question is about RESOURCE COMPETETION IN CONNECTION TO XENOPHOBIA and answering the question, “where do we draw a line between competition of Resources and Xenophobia?

Before we respond to this question, it’s important to understand some things clearly. Firstly is that competing over limited resources will always be there though what varies is the kind of competition in terms of those involved in this game. Who is competing who? And where do each one of them come from and why do they find themselves in this competition? What are the rules of the game and what safety nets do they put in place to protect the locals while at the same time accommodating those of different origins? What if the locals are not qualified enough to properly handle some other jobs, what do you do? How much of foreign expertise would you accommodate in a particular given time? How long would a nation take to produce its own?

Competition over resources becomes a xenophobic issue when government and faith community are not doing enough to develop and promote its own human capital. When locals are not given enough opportunities to develop their skills, they can be dangerous if one day they would want to take charge of their country’s destiny.

In a situation where good jobs are given to foreigners, naturally as a patriotic citizen of the land you have to react because in a normal way, you don’t expect jobs to be given to foreigners while qualified citizens are there. However in situation where there are no qualified citizen in a particular field, it becomes necessarily to employ other people even if they are foreigners because what you want is the job and things to be properly done. Such situations need to be made clear to avoid resentment from the locals. But the question could be what about those foreigners who come to do vending in a foreign land? Also what if locals don’t like to involve themselves in vending? Why should locals not be interested in vending?

As regard where you draw a thin line between Resource competition and xenophobia, I have this to say: that it’s not easy to have a clear cut thin line between the two because this varies. In a secular thought, some may argue that foreigners need to be given limited access to resources while others would say that it would depend on the professional experience and qualification that someone has. There are times when a foreigner is highly qualified and with superb experience such that his job conditions demands him or her to enjoy more privileges than locals.

But in a theological point of view, competition in the first place is not condoned because it’s not biblical. There is no biblical model which promoted competition in the first place. Anything that promotes elements of competition is outside the original plan of God. The Trinity from where we imitate and emulate from does not have any elements of competition but total unity and equal sharing of Trinitarian life. So I may argue that theologically, we don’t have enough ground of drawing a thin line between the two (locals and foreigners) and that the only thing could be to live in relation to the other based on the imago Dei. Just as the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit live perichoretically together, these different groups could live in unity and total oneness in the spirit of love and sharing.

NATIONALISM VERSUS XENOPHOBIA
The second question is in relation to NATIONALISM AND XENOPHOBIA AND HOW DO WE SEPARATE THE TWO? Before you begin to think of separating the two, it is important to understand what these two stands for. Nationalism is the people’s desire to rule themselves and in this case, they are able to do everything under their power to take control and rule. Xenophobia is the fear local people have when strangers or foreigners invade their space without notice.

Now if the spirit of nationalism is covered in the blanket of xenophobia (fearing of the foreigners) then something serious will have to be done in terms of clarifying the issue. There has to be a point and limit for locals or citizen of the land on how far they can go with issues. Nationalism has to have limits because while people can take control and rule, they will always come a time that they will need some extra expertise from somewhere else something which would force them to consult those of different race or nationalities for help. Now the only point where the two could separate is where great need for expertise from outside arises and in this case, being xenophobic could retard the desired progress and development. Being xenophobic in situation where a nation need extra human capital could be suicidal to national development. Xenophobia is not developmental oriented but is an enemy of progress. Xenophobia chases away potential and needed expertise for development and progress.

CAN A PERSON RULE MALAWI MORE THAN TWO TERMS OF OFFICE?

By: Peter Qeko Jere

One of the mostly hot issues in Malawi politics today is the question of whether the current constitution allows a person to rule the country after finishing his or her two terms of office. This is also whether after his two terms someone can go on five or ten years holiday then come back to rule again.

There has been many views shared on this topic in Malawi’s political economy currently and tempers have risen for some because they want the former president to rule the country again. Others are sick and tired and don’t want someone to come back from holiday after five or ten year to rule the country because they believe that Malawi is not a kingdom, somebody’s estate, farm or goldmine.

After a critically analyzing what many have said on this issue, we are compelled to share our views on the matter and show to the world and the nation the heart and mind of the framers of this constitution.

To begin with, here is what the controversial section 83 (3) of the Republic’s constitution says:

Section 83 (3) states the following:

The President, the first Vice President and the second Vice President may serve in their respective capacities a maximum of two consecutive terms but when a person is elected or appointed to fill the vacancy in the office of President or Vice President, the period between that election or appointment and the next election of a President shall not be regarded as a term.

When the framers of the constitution were putting down this document, they were doing this soon after we moved into multiparty democracy and the one major concern was that noone should ever be allowed to rule Malawi more than two terms of office. That time this was the key issue because every Malawian knew that it is not good to have someone rule for longer time because become ruthless. So in their mind they put the two term limit so that noone should think of coming back to power after retirement. Infact they had no idea that there was to be a time like this that someone would want to rule again after finishing his term of office.

So they made sure to put the maximum of two consecutive terms of office and this to them was not a problem at all because the key issue here is the two terms of office and that under whatever circumstances, noone has to come back and rule the third time using whatever definition. The guiding spirit of this constitution is that whether on uses the word consecutive or not, noone has to come again and rule after two terms of office. This is the key to everything in this section. So the question is how many has terms did Muluzi have? So if he rule Malawi for two terms then automatically he can not rule again because whatever formula or method he uses to rule would be interpreted as the third term because it will be the same Muluzi and not the other different Muluzi. What the constitution demands is that different people should come and rule after every ten years.

So it is a fallacy to say that in Malawi someone can rule again after two terms even if he comes back from his five or term years holiday because the Malawi constitution’s spirit is clear that every man has the opportunity to rule Malawi the maximum of two terms of office and not more than that.

Now let me show you something:

Muluzi ruled Malawi for ten years and that was how far the constitutionally he could go. But toward the end, he tried to change it (the first indicator) which shows that this man was not satisfied with what was given to him. He again came the second time with an open term bid which also never materialized because Malawian said no to such a thing which was (the second indicator) to show that worse things were on the way coming. It was not sooner or later that as he was in his retirement, we heard that he was planning to come back even though the same constitution said no to the third them of whatever form or version (the third indicator). We then heard that he had put in place a bunch of lawyers to help him fight the constitution so that he should come back and rule again (fourth indicator). Now the fact that he organized a bunch of lawyers to help him tear the constitution means that Muluzi has no regards for this document because as the former President, he should be exemplary and show respect to this document. It seems he is in a big hurry and wants to become the president of the country something which is unconstitutional and he can not win this battle in any court of law in the world. The constitution is not about twisting the wording of it but its about the SPIRIT THAT FLOWS IN IT. The spirit in the Malawi constitution is that we don’t bring a retired or former president back to office in Malawi because we know how bad this can be. History taught Malawians a lesson that never again will we as a nation allow someone to rule us more than two terms of office. The meaning of what Muluzi is doing now is that he wants to rule Malawi for twenty years because he has already done the first ten and he wants the other ten making twenty, the very thing that we don’t like in Malawi. We argue that this is a different version of third term because this is the same Muluzi and the same person not a different one hence he will continue from where he stopped. Whatever argument people may use, this will remain the third term which is unconstitutional.

Some have argued that the word “consecutive” was deliberately place to allow the incumbent president to break for a certain period and bounce back. This is a fallacy and wishful thinking because if the framers of the constitution had this in mind they could have definitely stipulated the number of years one has to stay in retirement before he bounces back. They could have done this so that people should not take Malawi their personal estate or goldmine. Now the absence of such prescription means that the framers of this document had one key goal of making sure that no one rules Malawi as a personal estate, that you can go on holiday and come back to rule in whatever manner possible.
The framers of the constitution blocked the retired president to avoid madness of the highest order in the country because it is not good to have one family rule Malawi for twenty year because Malawi is not one mans property, farm or goldmine. Malawi belongs to 12 Million people and it’s a lie that Muluzi is the only man who can rule Malawi better. Malawi has many blessed men and women who fail to take charge because they are blocked in the process by selfish leaders who don’t want to go home and enjoy their retirement. Time has come that none shall rule Malawi more than two terms of office using whatever. Malawians will stop any version of third term coming their way because we don’t want to go back to Egypt.