Africa: Getting ready for business amidst political uncertainty

One.org is elated by recent dramatic improvements in the business regulatory environment in Sub-Saharan Africa:

‘Complex regulations and high start-up costs can be a major barrier to business growth and development in Africa. However, the World Bank’s 9th Doing Business report, ‘Doing Business in a More Transparent World’ released last week found that ‘over the last year a record number of governments in sub-Saharan Africa changed their economy’s regulatory environment to make it easier for domestic firms to start up and operate.’

‘This is great news and it will hopefully mean that more legitimate businesses will be setting up on the continent –- something that is crucial for long-term poverty reduction in Africa...

‘This year, in sub-Saharan Africa — a region where eight years ago, little attention was paid to the regulatory environment — 78 percent of economies implemented Doing Business reforms, compared to an average of only 56 percent over the last six years. These changes to regulations can be highly beneficial. In Ghana, for example, in 2005, it used take business owners nearly three months to simply register a business. Now, following targeted aid programs and government leadership (which changed and enforced the regulatory process) registration time has been brought down to less than two weeks. The results are dramatic –- new business registrations are up by 87 percent with more than 21,000 new businesses created…

‘More still needs to be done to address these limitations to business growth and the appreciation of environmental and employment standards. But overall, as the Doing Business report shows, progress is being made in the right direction, which is encouraging.’

Next Billion explain why Cameroon and Liberia are classic cases of wasted potential:

‘Earlier this month, two western African countries held presidential elections. On the surface, they have little in common -- one country recently emerged from a brutal civil war and has an abysmal economy; the other has been peaceful for decades and enjoys abundant revenue streams.

And yet both Liberia and Cameroon are classic stories of wasted potential.

‘Since 1982, Cameroon has been ruled by a one-man presidential show, the secretive bureaucrat Paul Biya, 78. Routinely ranked among the most corrupt countries in the world, Cameroon has also achieved a ‘Not Free’ rating from Freedom House's political rights survey, grouping it with such continental all-stars as Somalia, Sudan, Zimbabwe and the DRC.

‘At least Ellen Johnson Sirleaf can blame a civil war for her country's stagnation. Paul Biya has had 30 years to capitalize on Cameroon's many economic and social advantages, with little to show for it. Just consider the following areas where Liberia -- its population, infrastructure, and institutions recently devastated by a 14-year war -- outstrips Cameroon...

‘Too often in Africa, we focus on the wars, the epidemics, the genocidal dictators. But Cameroon has killed its potential the quiet way - through years of mismanagement, corruption and abuse. All the while, Western nations cut aid checks and conduct cheerful business with this most refreshing oasis of political stability.’

The Moor Next Door revisits the death of former Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi which he tries to place in its proper political context:

‘Well meaning human rights groups and writers watched the humiliation of Mu’amar al-Qadhafi with horror. He faced no charges, stood at no trial and was dumped in a shipping container with a bullet in head. Pity he could not have faced a trial before the Libyan people or some international authority rather than being ripped up and executed in the street. Your blogger feels this was fitting enough: Qadhafi allowed his own enemies nothing much better. It is reasonable to worry that this might set a precedent for more such revenge killings for his supporters, that this might inspire (or validate) a tendency toward arbitrary mob ‘justice’ in the new Libya. It also the case that in the course of the war there was much of this sort of revenge killing on the fly. Those and the ones which may happen now and in the future are quite significant. Qadhafi’s death itself is emotionally satisfying but politically somewhat beside the point. The ‘tide’ had turned in Libya no later than the capture of Tripoli; building institutions (which it is now commonplace to say Qadhafi left none) and monopolizing the use of force is paramount now. As Paul Pillar notes, Qadhafi was not Napoleon and his elimination does not alter things for the new authorities in Libya any more than the capture of Saddam Hussein did for Americans in Iraq…

‘It would be fantastic for Libya’s new authorities to live up to liberal standards of the rule of law and transitional justice. They may well do so, if imperfectly… There will be messy incidents in transitional Libya.’

Asmarino Independent argues that political divisions within the Eritrean opposition have helped keep President Isaias Afewerki in power:

‘Death, torture, imprisonment has become the norm for Eritreans both inside and outside the country. The country is undergoing a process of silent extinction unless something immediate is done to deter this unfolding scenario. Young Eritreans are seeking refugee into neighboring countries of Ethiopia and Sudan in their hundreds on a daily bases. In an attempt to escape the harsh realities on those refugee camps many of the them attempt to go to Israel and end up in another nightmare, this time in the Sinai desert. They get tortured and killed by the Bedouins, unless ransom money is paid that amounts to 20,000 US dollars, their organs stolen and vanish in the wilderness.

Amid these catastrophic realities Eritreans by and large are passively witnessing, while these tragedy is unfolding in front of their eyes. Many outsiders ask, what is behind the silence of Eritreans, why have we failed this far, who could salvage the country from its ultimate disaster? And how long are we prepared to tolerate the intolerable condition?

The division and counter division in the opposition block has been the main reason that kept the dictator to stay in power without sound opposition. Therefore, first and foremost we need to understand our current state of affairs in terms of our political affiliations, who supports whom and why? These are crucial questions that need to be answered, if the struggle is to succeed in the shortest possible time frame.”

African Arguments’ Richard Dowden argues that the appropriate state model for Somalia is the Swiss model:

“The model for Somalia is Switzerland. Don’t laugh! Political power in Switzerland lies in the cantons – the 26 proud self-governing communities. The state, such as it is, deals with international matters and national law. Who cares – or even knows – who the president of Switzerland is. The way people live and are governed is decided locally. The Swiss confederation means that cantons have joined the state willingly and can leave if they want to. If they were a simple federation, they could not...

Somalia’s civil war began in the 1980s between clans in a winner takes all battle for total national power. The former British-ruled north west territory, Somaliland, declared independence. The north east, Puntland, also declared itself self governing until a proper government was restored. The centre, Galmudug, is also self governing. The war continues as a battle for Mogadishu, the capital and for the ports and fertile river valleys of the south. It has cost hundreds of thousands of lives... Although alliances have shifted, no formula has been devised that can bring peace at a national level...

The UN now talks glibly about restoring the Somali state and holding elections. This is the way to continue the war, not end it. Political parties in Somalia are little more than a cover for clans so an election simply elevates one clan over the others. Allow the government in Mogadishu to run the city and port, perhaps the Benadir region, but no further. Negotiations should then take place region by region about the relationship between them and the capital, leaving power in local – not national – hands.”

Congo Siasa believes that the deployment of US troops to Uganda to fight the LRA pay yield dividends as long as the US doesn’t repeat the errors of the Museveni regime:

‘US soldiers on the ground could help to provide some transparency in the LRA operations and perhaps a rapprochement between the Ugandans and the Congolese. Supplied with sophisticated communication technology US troops should be able to provide real time intelligence on the movements of LRA groups as well as the behavior of the Congolese and Ugandan soldiers. But claims that the US troops will help quickly finish the job the Ugandans started 23 years ago are most likely a serious exaggeration. Contrary to commonly held views of the LRA as a group of rag-tag bandits, Kony’s men are well-trained, disciplined and capable of enduring extreme hardships while covering large swathes of inhospitable territory.

While US engagement is welcome as it brings much needed attention to a largely neglected conflict, the current approach might need rethinking. In its existing form, the US has comprehensively adopted the unsuccessful Ugandan policy of all-out war without appearing to question its merits or fully appreciating potential repercussions…

History has shown that a focus on a military solution alone has done little to end the LRA war, while simultaneously increasing violence to civilians, a strategy preferred by LRA commanders when feeling cornered. Rather than focusing exclusively on advising Ugandan soldiers how to capture or kill Kony, the US troops should help devise and carry out better strategies to protect civilians and encourage LRA fighters to leave the ranks.”

Rwandankunda is wary of suggestions that the remaining cases at the International Tribunal on Rwanda be transferred to Rwanda:

“As the Arusha-based International Tribunal on Rwanda’s mandate nears completion, Paul Kagame has been relentlessly lobbying for the remaining cases (and the suspects) to be transferred back home. According to the regime, this would give more meaning to accountability as the perpetrators are tried where the crimes were committed. Furthermore, the regime argues, the victims will get to witness and participate in the trials, which will help curb impunity. In principle, Rwanda’s requests are reasonable. However, the regime’s contempt for human rights and the rule of law begs the fundamental question of whether the suspects would be accorded proper justice.

The justice minister, Tharacisse Karugarama, has spoken often of judicial reform. However, for all the rhetoric, many are still rightly skeptical of Rwanda’s ability to hold free and fair trials, more so if the cases at hand involve opponents of the ruling regime. Politics and law seem too closely convoluted in sinister ways that leave human rights defenders uncomfortable. Yet, despite the concerns that have been raised, we are told that the United States supports the transfer of the cases to Rwanda. Such a move on the part of the US is rather misguided... Perhaps the US has wrongly believed that the reforms were carried out. The reality on the ground shows otherwise.”

Scribbles from the Den publishes an uncompromising analysis of the Cameroon Presidential election by Robert Jackson, the US ambassador to Cameroon:

“In looking at the election, rather than blaming the Government, ELECAM, the Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement (CPDM), other political parties, and international actors for the irregularities, low turnout and voters’ lack of understanding of the actual voting process, one needs to look at what happened before the campaign ever began. One needs to examine the root causes of apathy, abstention and division. I submit to you that some Cameroonian civil society organizations are as guilty of blurring the line between civil society and opposition as the CPDM is of blurring the line between the party and Government.

It is clear that by being divided, the opposition severely hindered its chances of success. It did not join together to support a single, strong candidate. We all know that Cameroonian civil society and Cameroonian political parties, including the 200 or more opposition parties, are divided… Having thousands of small civil-society organizations and over 250 political parties -- in any society -- plays into the interests of the ruling party, dividing the people against themselves… This abundance of organizations and parties actually undercuts democratic principles because the entities do not represent people but isolated individuals or small groups. It is not democratic; it is persono-cratic, even ego-cratic, and erratic. As long as the opposition presents 22 candidates, one must ask if it -- and they -- are serious. Belatedly, some opposition parties are now talking about a common front. Shouldn’t they have done that months ago?”

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Dibussi Tande blogs at Scribbles from the Den.
* Please send comments to editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org or comment online at Pambazuka News.