Africa News blog

South Sudan’s era of prosperity?

Many South Sudanese hoped the country’s emergence as the world’s newest nation would begin an era of prosperity, but the country has remained mired in disputes with its northern neighbour over oil, the border and a many other issues.

The landlocked South shut off its oil production in January, instantly erasing 98 percent of state revenues, as part of a dispute with Sudan over how much it should pay to export crude using pipelines and other infrastructure in the north.

Discontent has been rising over the oil shutdown, which piled hardships on people already weary from years of conflict. While many South Sudanese are still basking in the pride of their hard-won political freedom, they are starting to ask when they will enjoy the material benefits of independence.

Prices have been soaring, forcing many people to tighten their belts while corruption has gone largely unchecked.

Timbuktu tomb destroyers pulverise Islam’s history

The al Qaeda-linked Islamist fighters who have used pick-axes, shovels and hammers to shatter earthen tombs and shrines of local saints in Mali’s fabled desert city of Timbuktu say they are defending the purity of their faith against idol worship.

But historians say their campaign of destruction in the UNESCO-listed city is pulverising part of the history of Islam in Africa, which includes a centuries-old message of tolerance.

Over the last three days, Islamists of the Ansar Dine rebel group which in April seized Mali’s north along with Tuareg separatists destroyed at least eight Timbuktu mausoleums and several tombs, centuries-old shrines reflecting the local Sufi version of Islam in what is known as the “City of 333 Saints”.

For centuries in Timbuktu, an ancient Saharan trading depot for salt, gold and slaves which developed into a famous seat of Islamic learning and survived occupations by Tuareg, Bambara, Moroccan and French invaders, local people have worshipped at the shrines, seeking the intercession of the holy individuals.

S.Africa must reform white-dominated economy

South Africa’s economy is still largely under the control of whites who held power under apartheid, President Jacob Zuma has said calling  for a “dramatic shift” to redress the wealth balance more evenly in favour of the black majority.

Zuma, speaking at the start of a major policy meeting of his ruling African National Congress, said the challenges of poverty, unemployment and inequality posed long-term risks for Africa’s richest country 18 years after the end of apartheid.

Without giving details, he called for a “dramatic shift and giant leap” in coming years to spread the country’s wealth more equitably, mentioning the distribution of mineral resources and land ownership as areas which needed to be overhauled. Zuma said the proposed “second transition” was necessary to complement the negotiated end of apartheid in 1994, when he said “certain compromises” over economic ownership had been made to ensure a smooth political transition from white minority rule.

The ANC has drafted a raft of policy documents that call on mining firms to pay more to the state to help finance welfare spending.The proposals also advocate relying on state-owned enterprises to be engines of job creation and growth. Zuma said the debate over how the country’s mining wealth should be used must go beyond simply the question of “to nationalise or not to nationalise.” Calls for nationalisation from some sectors of the ruling ANC have stirred investor concerns in the world’s No. 1 platinum producer.

Is Africa Union justified in moving its summit to Ethiopia

The African Union has moved its July summit to the Ethiopian capital after Malawi blocked the attendance of Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC), the bloc said

Malawi last month asked the African Union to prevent Bashir from taking part in the event, saying his visit would have “implications” for its aid-dependent economy.

As an ICC member state, Malawi would be obliged to arrest Bashir if he enters its territory. Bashir is accused of masterminding genocide and other atrocities in Darfur. The ICC’s chief prosecutor has called for aid cuts to countries that fail to detain him.

Is Israel right in deporting African migrants

Israel this week started deporting a planeload of migrants to South Sudan early on Monday, the first of a series of weekly repatriation flights intended as a stepping stone to dealing with much greater influxes of migrants from Sudan, Eritrea and Ivory Coast.

About 60,000 Africans have crossed into Israel across its porous border with Egypt in recent years. Israel says the vast majority are job seekers, disputing arguments by humanitarian agencies that they should be considered for asylum.

Many in Israel see the Africans as a threat to public order and to the demographics of the Jewish state. Street protests, some violent, have put pressure on the government, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned of Africans “flooding” and “swamping” Israel, threatening “the character of the country”.

The government has seized on the few hundred South Sudanese migrants, whose de facto refugee status was rescinded by an Israeli court this month, and whose government, sympathetic to Israel, is happy to take them back

Are African governments suppressing art?

By Cosmas Butunyi

The dust is finally settling on the storm that was kicked off in South Africa by a controversial painting of President Jacob Zuma with his genitals exposed.

The country that boasts one of the most liberal constitutions in the world and the only one on the African continent with a constitutional provision that protects and defends the rights of  gays and lesbians , had   its values put up to  the test  after an artist    ruffled feathers by a painting that questioned the moral values  of the ruling African National Congress . 

For weeks, the storm ignited by the painting  called  ‘The Spear’, raged on, sucking in Goodman Gallery that displayed it and City Press, a weekly newspaper that had published it on its website. The matter eventually found its way into the corridors of justice, where the ruling ANC sought redress against the two institutions. The party also mobilised its supporters to stage protests outside the courtroom when the case it filed came up for hearing. They also matched to the gallery and called for a boycott of City Press , regarded as one of the country’s most authoritative newspapers. 

 The controversy  has cooled down now that the newspaper  has  removed the artwork from its website, the gallery pulled it down  after it was defaced. The ANC  has withdrawn its lawsuit.

Throughout this drama, one issue that came up frequently in the huge debate that it kicked off, was the issue of artistic licence, specifically in Africa.

Is Zuma home and dry after Malema’s expulsion?

By Cosmas Butunyi

South Africa’s ruling African National Congress may have expelled the rubble-rousing youth league president, Julius Malema, but challenges still remain for President Jacob Zuma, who is seeking a second term in a race that he is considered the frontrunner.

Observers say that Malema, who is considered one of the most prominent members of the party to openly break from Zuma, still can be a thorn in his side even though he is permanently barred from party-related events. He may use his expulsion to sharpen his criticism against Zuma’s government.

Zakhele Ndlovu, a political analyst at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, says that while numerous predictions are being made of a possible Zuma victory in December, ‘anything can happen’ due to the changing balance of power in the party.

“People who sympathise with him could become influential and bring him back,” Zakhele told Reuters.

It is nearly impossible for Malema to return to the party before its electoral meeting at the end of the year. He would first need the approval of the ANC’s National Executive Committee, which is led by Zuma and stacked with his supporters. Even if he were to win over the NEC, Malema does not have the support of ANC delegates now to win reinstatement.

Is Joyce Banda the answer to Malawi ’s problems?

By Isaac Esipisu

The continents’ newest and second Africa’s  female president took over the reins of power in Malawi to offer a new and more responsive style of leadership that is expected to spur economic recovery of one of Africa’s poorest nation. Joyce Banda was sworn in as president two days after President Bingu wa Mutharika died of heart attack at 78.

The new president, Joyce Banda started her presidency in an enthusiastic and robust way; mending ties with foreign donors that could see Malawi pull out of an economic crisis. The new president of Zambia , Michael Sata, is making the transition easier, contributing 5 million litres of petrol that should help the economy. Banda, a 61-year-old policeman’s daughter who won recognition for championing the education of underprivileged girls, now enjoys widespread support among a population whose lives grew increasingly difficult under Mutharika

Mutharika, a former World Bank economist, also got off to a good start in 2004.   Malawi was at the time the darling of international donors. Programmes to subsidize fertilizer and provide seeds to farmers created an economic revival that made it one of the world’s fastest growing economies. But his fortunes turned dramatically and upon his death many Malawians were openly celebrating his passing.

In 2005 the country declared a national disaster as more than five million people were in need of food aid because of widespread shortages due to bad harvests. However, three years later the country produced a bumper harvest, turning it into the breadbasket of the region, mainly because of the success of Mutharika’s fertiliser and seed subsidy programme.

But under his leadership Malawi was at odds with its traditionally largest donor, Britain , following a decision by the government about a year ago to expel the British High Commissioner after he accused Mutharika for “increasingly becoming dictatorial” in a leaked diplomatic telegram. There were nationwide protests against Mutharika’s rule in July 2011 as Malawians personally blamed him for the country’s economic woes and the persistent fuel and foreign exchange shortages. Mutharika was criticized for calling in the police to quell the protests, which resulted in 20 deaths, as he vowed to crush the rebellion against him.

Turkcell’s dubious case against MTN

 By Alison Frankel NEW YORK (Reuters) – On February 28, during oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court in an Alien Tort Statute suit by a group of Nigerians who accused Shell of complicity in state-sponsored torture in their country, Justice Samuel Alito interrupted the Nigerians’ lawyer, Paul Hoffman of Schonbrun DeSimone Seplow Harris Hoffman & Harrison. “What business does a case like this have in the courts of the United States?” Alito said.

Enough justices agreed with Alito that days after the argument in the case, called Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, the Supreme Court decided it was more interested in the extraterritorial application of the Alien Tort Statute than in the nominal issue in Kiobel, which concerned corporate liability under the ATS. In an extraordinary post-argument order, the justices called for additional briefing from both sides on the question of “whether and under what circumstances the Alien Tort Statute allows courts to recognize a cause of action for violations of the law occurring within the territory of a sovereign other than the United States.”

Whoever defends South Africa’s MTN Group in a new suit in federal court in Washington, is going to be very interested in the answer the Supreme Court eventually delivers to that question. In a 70-page complaint filed on March 28, the Turkish cellular services company Turkcell is asserting the Alien Tort Statute against MTN Group . According to Turkcell’s lawyers at Patton Boggs, MTN engaged in all sorts of corporate skullduggery, from bribery to peddling votes at the United Nations, to wrest away Turkcell’s contract to provide private mobile phone service in Iran. Turkcell said that MTN’s conduct is a “violation of the law of nations,” and has demanded $4.2 billion in damages.

The Turkish company’s allegations were explosive enough to have led to a 6 percent fall in MTN’s share price since the suit was filed . “MTN used its high-level political influence within the South African government to offer Iran the two most important items that the country could not obtain for itself: (1) support for the Iranian development of nuclear weapons; and (2) the procurement of high-tech defense equipment,” the complaint said. “MTN developed a scheme to trade these items — nuclear votes and illicitly procured arms — for (Turkcell’s)license. MTN furthered its scheme by bribing and trading in influence with government officials in both Iran and South Africa in exchange for the license…. MTN went so far as to create a code name for its corrupt scheme — ‘Project Snooker.’ Between February 2004 and November 2005, MTN Group worked feverishly to ‘snooker’ its business competitor through these corrupt arrangements.”

I have no idea of the merits of Turkcell’s assertions. But I don’t think Turkcell’s case has much chance of surviving as a cause of action in the U.S. courts, which are increasingly resistant to the idea that they’re an appropriate forum for disputes with little connection to this country.

Turkcell tries hard to make a case for U.S. jurisdiction. (In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever before seen such a strenuous venue argument in an opening complaint.) MTN, the suit said, is headquartered in South Africa, but its shares also trade as American Depository Receipts, and the company derives significant revenue from sales of phone cards and cell services to U.S. customers. Two of the company’s directors are U.S. residents, according to the complaint, which also said MTN has received financing from U.S. lenders and uses U.S. banks. Moreover, according to Turkcell, MTN allegedly breached a non-disclosure agreement it signed in Washington, in the course of settlement talks at the beginning of 2012.

Australia worse than Africa for mining? Yikes!: Clyde

By Clyde Russell The idea that Australia is a more dangerous place for mining investment than Mali might seem strange to most observers, but that’s exactly the view of the boss of the world’s third-biggest gold producer. Mark Cutifani, the chief executive officer of AngloGold Ashanti, said last week he was more concerned about government policies toward mining in Australia than about nationalism in Africa. On the face of it, this is an extraordinary comment that has gone largely unreported by both the Australian and international media. How can it possibly be that Australia, a stable Western democracy with rule of law, independent courts and a culture of vigorous debate, is a more risky place than countries like Mali, which had a military coup last month and is battling an insurgency by Tuareg separatists? Of course, it may be that Cutifani, an Australian-born mining engineer who has headed the Johannesburg-based company since October 2007, was ramping up the rhetoric to make a point when he talked to reporters on March 27 in Perth, capital of the resource-rich state of Western Australia. But this would appear to be at odds with his previous record of speaking sensibly about the gold-mining industry while remaining an advocate of the interests of his global company. The point Cutifani was probably trying to drive home is that the debate in Australia over its vast mineral resources appears to have veered off-track and descended into political point-scoring. “The politicians and we as industry leaders are missing each other,” the Australian Associated Press quoted him as saying. “Somehow, we’ve got to land this discussion and stop the class warfare-type conversations and turn the conversations into constructive dialogue about the future of the country and the industry.” To be fair, Cutifani has also lobbied against proposals for a resource rent tax in South Africa and moves to raise taxes in other African countries where AngloGold operates, such as Ghana and Mali. But for Australia, the background to his comments is an intensifying war of words between Wayne Swan, the treasurer in the Labor Party-led minority government, and mining magnates over the new Mineral Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) and the carbon tax. Both these taxes are due to start on July 1 and have raised the ire of many industries and the opposition Liberal Party.

The MRRT will impose a 30 percent levy on so-called super profits of large coal and iron ore, and doesn’t yet include other producers such as gold miners. The carbon tax will impose a price of A$23 on the emissions of the top 500 polluters, to be phased in, while reducing income taxes for poorer households in order to offset the expected increase in energy costs. The Labor Party, which has slumped in opinion polls partly over public disquiet over the new taxes and a broken promise not to introduce a carbon tax by Prime Minister Julia Gillard, appears to be following the tactic of stoking the politics of envy as a distraction method. Since the financial crisis that sparked the global recession in 2008 it has been easy for politicians to attack the rich and blame untrammeled greed for the economic carnage. In Australia, the target is billionaire mining barons and Swan attacked iron ore magnates Gina Rinehart and Andrew Forrest as well as coal developer Clive Palmer in an essay published last month. Interestingly enough, Swan didn’t attack BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, the two global miners that led initial opposition to a stiffer resource tax that was watered down after Gillard deposed former prime minister Kevin Rudd in a party-room coup. Swan accused the billionaires of trying to use their wealth to “distort public policy,” apparently without any sense of irony, given that he was using his position as the second-most powerful politician in Australia to do the same. It seems to me that Australia would benefit from a more sensible debate on how to ensure the mineral wealth is developed in a way that rewards the owners of capital that take the risks of developing projects as well the overall economy and citizens in general. Debate in Australia appears to be driven by short-term political cycles, with federal elections every three years leading politicians to focus more on spin than sound policies. Is the MRRT the best design that could have been implemented? Will it raise sufficient revenue without leading to less investment, and will it help ensure the long-term viability of mining? Should the revenue it raises be used to fund a one percentage point cut in the company tax rate, as Labor proposes, or would it be better put toward building a sovereign wealth fund? These are all valid points for debate, but aren’t getting a hearing in Australia currently. Instead, as AngloGold’s Cutifani pointed out, there is an unedifying mud-slinging match that does little to enhance the reputations of either Swan or his targets.