Press Release: 30 Million Euros in the Health Sector commited today from Germany to the EAC

GermanyEAC180815P2

Ranking of Peace in the East Africa Countries in 2015

East-Africa

First and foremost I will address what the trending and ranking means. What kind of things that the Global Peace Index does and what kind of attributes and recent history means for individual countries. All of this makes violence, homicides, social security, militarization which is part of the evaluation of the scores which makes the Index. The countries that will take on is Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania and Uganda. Which have different histories, though they are close to each other? Why are the numbers so far apart? What makes this? We can wonder. But look through what been said in the report and the numbers.

Last years trend:

“Over the past eight years the average country score deteriorated 2.4 percent, highlighting that on average the world has become slightly less peaceful. However, this decrease in peacefulness has not been evenly spread, with 86 counties deteriorating while 76 improved. MENA has suffered the largest decline of any region in the world, deteriorating 11 per cent over the past eight years (GPI, P: 2).

Economic price of violence:

“The economic impact of violence on the global economy in 2014 was substantial and is estimated at US$14.3 trillion or 13.4 per cent of world GDP. This is equivalent to the combined economies of Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom. Since 2008, the total economic impact on global GDP has increased by 15.3 per cent, from US$12.4 trillion to US$14.3 trillion” (GPI, P: 3).

“Societal safety and security:

This section analyses the effects of urbanisation on violence, and finds that peace generally increases with higher levels of urbanisation. This is a by-product of higher levels of development. However, countries that have weak rule of law, high levels of intergroup grievances and high levels of inequality are more likely to experience deteriorations in peace as urbanisation increases” (GPI, P: 3).

“Militarisation:

Since 1990, there has been a slow and steady decrease in measures of global militarisation, with large changes in militarisation occurring rarely and usually associated with larger, globally driven geopolitical and economic shifts” (GPI, P: 3).

Important evaluation that makes the GPI:

  • Ongoing domestic and international conflict
  • Societal safety and security
  • Millitarisation
  • Indirect cost of violence: Accounts for costs that are not directly related to an act of violence and accrue over the long run. This can include losses of income due to injury or pain or grievance of others who were not directly involved in the crime.
  • Internal Peace: A set of indicators that measures how peaceful a country is inside its
  • national borders
  • Negative Peace: The absence of violence or fear of violence.
  • Positive Peace: The attitudes, institutions and structures which create and sustain peaceful societies. These same factors also lead to many other positive outcomes that support the optimum environment for human potential to flourish.
  • Positive Peace Index (PPI): A composite measurement of Positive Peace based on 24 indicators grouped into eight domains.
  • Resilience: The ability of a country to absorb and recover from shocks, for example natural disasters or fluctuations in commodity prices.
  • Violence containment: Economic activity related to the consequences or prevention of violence where the violence is directed against people or property.

(GPI, P: 4).

Listings of Peaceful ratings:

World Rank: Country: Score: State of the Peace: Change in Score: Regional Rank:
130 Burundi 2,323 Low +,0,009 34
155 Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) 3,085 Very Low -0,033 41
119 Ethiopia 2,234 Low -0,143 27
133 Kenya 2,323 Low -0,086 35
139 Rwanda 2,420 Low -0,027 38
157 Somalia 3,307 Very Low -0,079 42
159 South Sudan 3,383 Very Low +0,107 44
64 Tanzania 1,903 Medium -0,024 10
111 Uganda 2,197 Medium +0,013 24

(GPI P: 8-9, P: 13)

The Regional Rank is set for the region of Sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore the regional rank is different from the World Rank. In the World rank it goes from 64 of Tanzania and 159 of South Sudan. That is 100 countries in between in the World, when we talk about peaceful environment and the fear should be one South Sudan (159), Somalia (157) and DRC (155).  Tanzania which is on top is the 64. Next place is for Uganda was ranked on 111, the third and fourth country in the region which was near each other was Kenya (133) and Rwanda (139). And the fifth place is Burundi (130) – which I am certain will fall on the rank after the elections in 2015. But for the GPI 2015 there is still high level for the region.

On Armed Conflicts and War in Sub-Saharan Africa: “Although sub-Saharan Africa has the highest number of conflicts, these conflicts tend not to last as long as in other regions. There were only three conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa in 2013 which started more than three years ago, two of which are long-standing conflicts in Ethiopia” (GPI, P: 51).

On Peacefulness in the region: “In 2008, MENA had the same level of peacefulness as sub-Saharan Africa, and was the 6th most peaceful region in the world. By 2015 it has become the least peaceful region in the world, deteriorating by 11 per cent over the period” (GPI, P: 55).

On South Sudan: “South Sudan’s ranking declined by only three places, but this was on top of by far the sharpest fall in the 2014 GPI. It remains embroiled in the civil conflict that broke out in December 2013, and which has thus far proved immune to numerous peace efforts” (…) “South Sudan also fell for its third consecutive year, slipping a further 3 places to 159. (GPI, P: 13, 16).

On Somalia: Somalia is on the highest cost of violence percentage of GDP which was 22%. “The majority of” (…) “Somalia’s costs stem from IDPs and refugees and homicides” (…) “The same category represents 54 per cent of Somalia’s total costs. (GPI, P: 77).

The difference is staggering from Somalia and South Sudan to the best state of peace in Tanzania. The other countries in between is ranked so close and with scores that could easily point them further down for next year if the militarization and violence inside the countries continue. Like I have a grand feeling that Burundi will fall on the ranking next year, also Uganda with the recent attacks and continuously going against opposition to the Presidential elections in 2016. Rwanda will sure shut down anybody who goes against the third term of Paul Kagame. There are also issues that are meeting Joseph Kabila’s planed third term in Democratic Republic of Congo. Ethiopia is in a stalemate of totalitarian regime that keeps the borders clear and with the resistance that comes from Somalia or the Omoro Liberation Front (OLF). Kenya has issues with building the border to Somalia where they has also taken districts in Somalia. And Kenya has the fear of Al-Shabab after the terrorist attack in Nairobi (2013) and that has happen also in Kampala (2010) in Uganda.

Therefore these rankings are important to look at because you can see what the state of ease is at, this is about the peace and impact of the authoritarian and totalitarian regimes in these countries. And will be good to follow and see how it really turns out in the next year rankings from the same place the Institute for Economic and Peace.

Hope it’s been a drop of enlightenment for you as well. Peace.

Reference:

Institute for Economics and Peace: “Global Peace Index – 2015 – Measuring Peace, its causes and its economic value”

Power eats our big-men – The reason for why we need Presidential Term limits

stock-footage--s-newsreel-story-roosevelt-wins-third-term

There is for some strange reason a big discussion on the matter. Since some countries have them, some don’t. It is not like every constitution should be written the same with the same accords. In my homeland for instance there is no limit on how long the Prime Minister can sit in power, but that that depends if the people of my country get tired of the PM or the party affiliated with the PM. In bigger countries like the US there is a limit of two terms and only once a President who has broken that rule, was during Second World War and that was Franklin D. Roosevelt. Who had three terms and is the only one well known.

I am sure that Greece would have seemed happy with more often change of leadership. So if they hadn’t sunk that deep with loans and debt. Then it wouldn’t matter how long a regime is in power, if it essentially good, but if it’s not. Then it would be healthy with changes, so that the government recharge and fix the issues of old.  That is for check and balance, also to stop cogging the machine with nepotism and local graft from local councils and smaller government entities.

Now that Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Rwanda and Burundi is following Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Uganda. They have big-men who have been sitting for ages and continue to break a certain switch of leaders. Burundi has just been through a farce of a election that brought their President Pierre Nkurunziza to his third term. Paul Kagame in Rwanda is thinking the same. Paul Biya the President of Cameroon has ruled since 1982 and is still sitting comfortable. Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo has been the president of Equatorial Guinea has been in charge since 1979. Omar Al-Bashir in President of Sudan has been the chief since 1993. Robert Mugabe is the President of Zimbabawe is the big-men of the country since 1987. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni the President of Uganda has been the head honcho since 1986.

Have in mind Ben Ali in Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar Gadaffi in Libya. All of them had a hard fall during the Arab Spring. So during a short period of time these long times serving rulers was ousted by the public or militias in their countries. And those people mentioned that has been sitting since 1979 to now should have them in mind. They could be next.

Its reasons like this big-men why countries and constitutions, law and rule of laws should fix the longevity for the leaders of the countries. Even if some countries has benefited from leaders sitting long. There have been many who show other tales. That their starting and dealing with matters. Making sure that the countries are progressing, but the issue with all men, power can eat you and when it’s at your grasp you don’t want to leave it. The power corrupt and make sure your family eats and friends to. An leave the matters and supposed people your supposed to serve. That makes the basic issue of leaders who becomes the proof of states where there is “taxation without representation”. They goes from being heroes and big-men with legacy into Machiavellian and Orwellian monsters that swallows the governments, states and organizations. That evaporates and follows the pinpoints from the leaders, but not actual procedures or democratic values. Transparency does matters, checks and balance of information from the regimes dies down especially if it pokes at the government. Ethics of codes of conduct matters for the ruling party, but for the opposition is otherwise since they will be thrown into shackles and dungeons for standing up against the regimes.

There is a reason why media has to be strong against this leaders and big-men. Why term limits is a good thing? It’s because power corrupt and eat men. When you first get a spoon of the sweets they want the champagne and cocktails in the statehouses. While many of the big-men don’t strengthen the basic institutions and ministries of the countries they are in charge of. Instead they put more money into the security and armies, but not too strong because then they are worried that their general’s would make a coup d’etat, especially since some of them took power by the gun themselves. So they usually promise grand changes and grace periods where the institutions left soiling by former leaders. While they does certain things and necessary by them, if so only what needed and supported through aid or donor money they might do something more with this.

While these leaders also often toiled with multilateral organization that put strains on the economic freedoms and loans that funds the countries. The forced moves of liberate institutions instead of strengthen the powers of the nations. Free market thinking that has weakened the economies then making them stronger. So that they import more then they export. Produce simple raw material or farm products and import finished sophisticated products that give the budgets negatives for the countries and also a reason why the countries end up with loaning more money from the multilateral organization. Because of this the big-men make shady deals with international donor countries and producers that lead to more corruption. Their zealous and loyalist under-leaders get cuts and that happens as long as they follow the party lines. The sellers from abroad couldn’t care less because usually they get overpaid for the product and there wasn’t a fair process of the sale. So if there is a transparent overlook of the sale and ordering of the products to the country it wouldn’t have gotten a green light.

This thing grows and grows until it hit either the moon or the sun. The terms are what people looking at. Then you could have discussed and talked more directly about the countries that don’t have it. There isn’t like universal rules to how the constitutions should be and what countries should have in it. There is other ways around that countries has to follow the international agreements, resolutions, charters and convents they have to follow and make amendments to their existing laws. But that is whole other matter. The term limit question is more about the ethical place and trust in the big-men that is either elected or taken power on their own. And if you have issues with leaders taking power on their own, there is a slim chance of them actually caring about rule of law. Instead even if they say something they will turn against close to date of the final period of terms. Just like Yoweri Museveni did in Uganda, Pierre Nkurunziza did in Burundi, Paul Kagame in Rwanda and Joseph Kabila in Democratic Republic in Congo (DRC). They all did a turn-around in limited time right before the end of the official second term. So they could fix the laws and get an official third term.

We the people and the citizens care about our big-men and nations, about the institutions that are made to be around us and supposed to support us. As we want good leaders that actually lead and make changes, and structures to secure their people. Instead when their reign for so long that their stealing of wealth, lands and positions for loyalist can be vial and hurting the country, instead of reaching and making the place better. This could be less of a viable possibility if there were structures and codes into place that pushed leaders to leave behind a legacy and go off in grace instead of sitting into the man with a scythe coming and taking their souls to eternal rest.

If society fears that leaders will lead into nepotism, graft, corruption and other evils of long term stand still of leaders and philosophy. The journey that the political climate needs is sufficient tools to stand in rainy days and in glorious ones. Also proper training to lead the next generations into a secure place and leave a foundation that can bring something positive for the people and the nations as whole.

And it isn’t pure and true leadership if they aren’t coping with the ability of leaving the power. They know that and we the people know this. When that happens we see the issues translate into situations that nobody really wants to see. Like the failed Coup d’etat in Burundi in 2015 and the violence that has surged since. Then the failings of the ‘Walk to Work’ protest after the 2011 elections in Uganda. That only led to few fallen activists for the cause, but lead to now initial change. Also the reactions in the DRC after lawfully allowing it’s president a third term, this made people react and the #Telema uprising happened as a aftermath. This because the leaders don’t accept their reach and doesn’t step down in time, instead tries to sit until the chair is breaking. And in due time they will fall out of the chair, it’s just about how they will land and which legacy they want to leave behind.

I am Sure Honorable Mister Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe could have been a real gentleman and been in the league of freedom fighters who fought a just cause against oppression of a foreign power. He could have been seen as that if he stepped down in proper time and given security to the country. Instead he has let the economy run loose, people fleeing the country, rigging elections, letting special army and police trained by North Koreans go into villages before elections and spread fear amongst the citizens. If he had stopped before turning into a villain, he could have been seen as hero. Something that would been worthy actually of how he fought with the comrades against a far-away rulers to secure peaceful nationhood to Zimbabwe together with Joshua Nkomo. Today he will not only be remembered only for the Lancaster House Agreement! But for all of the other madness that has happen after.

The same will happen with these other leaders who might have done great things. And they have made a difference. They have made some kind of changes and progress in their countries. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni of Uganda has made progress in Uganda. Even by sitting very-very long in the chair of power. After uncertainties of the 80s he has with the Movement system made the land peaceful and that has made gains in the aspect of food productions. Even with help of neighbors and the U.S. sent LRA on the run to C.A.R. where he is trying to get them again. Though with lingering into power it’s now taking a toll on the budgets, inflation levels, value of the currency and the enormous level of spending to local councils since there is new district every 5 years or so.

I could go on about every leader I have mentioned and what has happen because of their steadiness of power. How that effects and what that has led to in the countries that their leading, still. Similarities are still that the countries don’t earn much on having the same leaders reigning for many terms. Because the countries getting sucked into the system and patrons of the big-man instead of build functioning institutions and ministries to really developing the countries.

And let this be clear, I don’t want the systems of the West unto these countries that is not what I am implying. The simple thing I am pounding on is how it will be healthy for a nation to have leaders and their big-men for too long. I doubt if it is healthy. The same with MPS and Ministers, they all will eat too much and become fat, instead of serving the people. The same happens with the grand big-man; therefore the change of leadership is an essential feature to society and government.

Therefore what I am initially implying is that no matter what kind of society the human soul and body will be eaten by the power. That’s simple reason is that this is a universal issue, the location and countries could be a mayor in my town for the matter or the leader of European Union, the secondly it could be a president in South America or Asia. This is a phenomenon that is everywhere if the big-man has the possibility. Let me take a few more honorable mentions:

  • Alexander Lukashenko has been the president of Belarus since 1994.
  • Saparmurat Atayevich Niyazov has been the president of Turkmenistan since 1985.
  • Nursultan Nazarbayev has been the president of Kazahstan since 1989.
  • Issas Afweki has been been the president of Eritrea since 1991.
  • Emomali Rahmon has been the president of Tajikistan since 1992.
  • Hun Sen has been the president of Cambodia since 1985.

So thanks for reading. Hope it was worth it and that this wasn’t as long as the tenure of certain big-men. Peace.

Press Release: On the assassination attempt on Mr. Pierre-Claver Mbonimpa (05.08.2015)

IHRDA-ACHPR-30-brand-final-with-wording-n-logo-for-website

The Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders in Africa of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Special Rapporteur), Mrs. Reine Alapini-Gansou, expresses deep concern at the assassination attempt on the President of the Association for the Protection of Human Rights and Detained Persons in Burundi (A.PRO.DH), Mr. Pierre-Claver Mbonimpa on Monday, 3 August 2015 in Burundi.

The Special Rapporteur strongly condemns this situation and expresses concern about the health condition of this human rights defender.

She expresses further concern for the safety of Mr. Mbonimpa and that of human rights defenders in the Republic of Burundi, particularly in the current context of increased violence since the announcement of the candidacy of President Pierre Nkurunziza for the 2015 presidential elections, followed by his re-election.

The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of the Republic of Burundi of its commitments under international and regional human rights protection instruments, in particular, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and specifically, its articles 1, 4 and 5.

The Special Rapporteur strongly urges the relevant authorities of the Republic of Burundi to take immediate measures to ensure that Mr. Pierre Claver Mponimpa receives proper emergency medical care in a safe environment.

She also urges the relevant authorities to take the necessary measures to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of this serious violation of human rights.

The Special Rapporteur further calls upon the Burundian authorities to take appropriate action to avoid the occurrence of other attacks and violations of the rights of human rights defenders.

Finally, the Special Rapporteur emphasizes the need for Burundian authorities to take all necessary measures to comply with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other relevant human rights instruments ratified by the Republic of Burundi.

Press Release: AMISOM takes note of allegations against its troops in Marka and remains committed to Adressing these charges (04.08.2015)

AMISOM040815

SG/SM/16986-AFR/3188: Concerned about Deteriorating Security Situation in Burundi, Secretary-General Calls on Authorities to Investigate Recent Political Assassinations (03.08.2015)

Gen Adolphe

The following statement was issued today by the Spokesman for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon:

The Secretary-General notes with great concern the continuing deterioration of the security environment in Burundi following an electoral period marked by violence and the violation of human rights, including the right to life.

In this context, the Secretary-General strongly condemns the killing of General Adolphe Nshimirimana on 2 August.  He welcomes President [Pierre] Nkurunziza’s message to the nation to remain calm and to the competent authorities to expeditiously investigate this assassination in order to bring the perpetrators to justice.  He calls on the Burundian authorities to investigate diligently other recent political assassinations.

The Secretary-General renews his appeal to all Burundians to resume an inclusive dialogue without delay and peacefully settle their differences under the facilitation of President [Yoweri Kaguta] Museveni as mandated by the East African Community.

The Secretary-General remains committed to supporting peace consolidation and conflict prevention efforts in Burundi.

Press Release: AU Commission Chairperson horrified at the assassination of General Adolphe Nshimirimana in Burundi (02.08.2015)

AUBurundi020815

Press Release: World Population Projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050 with most growth developing regions, especially Africa – Says UN (29.07.2015)

WPP UN P1WPP UN P2WPP UN P3

Press Release: Western Union Celebrates its 20th Anniversary in Africa (28.07.2015)

WU Africa AD

ACCRA, Ghana–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Western Union Company (NYSE:WU, a leader in global payment services, today celebrated its 20th anniversary in Africa. With over 34,000 locations and connections to millions of bank accounts and mobile wallets in more than 50 countries and territories, across Africa, the Western Union network serves millions of senders and receivers with a choice of 120 currencies.

To celebrate this special milestone, Western Union’s President for Africa, Middle East, Asia Pacific, Eastern Europe and CIS, Jean Claude Farah, in addition to Aida Diarra, Western Union’s Regional Vice President and Head of Africa and other members of the Africa leadership team visited the first agent location at ADB (Agricultural Development Bank) that offered Western Union money transfer services for the first time in Africa in 1995. The WU leadership team also visited Ecobank head office in Accra and marked the occasion with the launch of the Account Based Money Transfer services through ATM in Ghana.

The Western Union 20th Anniversary celebration in Ghana in Africa, coincides with a speech made by President Barack Obama at the African Union Headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, where he is quoted saying:

“Today, Africa is one of the fastest-growing regions in the world. Africa’s middle class is projected to grow to more than one billion consumers. With hundreds of millions of mobile phones, surging access to the Internet, Africans are beginning to leapfrog old technologies into new prosperity. Africa is on the move, a new Africa is emerging.”

Western Union is committed to the expansion and development of its pan-African network which provides a critical link to the ever growing African Diaspora living and working in countries around the world.

“More than 30 million Africans live outside their home countries, contributing billions of USD in remittances to their families and communities back home every year1”, said Jean Claude Farah. “We are very humbled to play a role in helping them move their money as they seek to elevate their economic status, meet emergency needs, support healthcare requirements, contribute to the education of future generations and in many instances build their own small businesses. By moving money for better for 20 years Western is enabling a world of possibilities for Africa and in Africa.”

Aida Diarra added, “Through the work we do we also enable economic activity and job creation. Currently over 155,000 Front Line Associates (FLAs) are employed in our agent network on the African continent. Western Union invests in training these FLAs developing their business, technical and compliance skills.”

In addition to the socio-economic impact that remittances enable, the company also supports philanthropic activities in Africa via the Western Union Foundation which has a long history of giving back to communities across the African continent. It supports organizations that promote economic opportunity and growth for individuals, families and entire communities throughout the region. Since its creation, the Western Union Foundation has committed to $8.703 million in grants and donations to 158 NGOs in more than 40 countries across Africa.

About Western Union

The Western Union Company (NYSE: WU) is a leader in global payment services. Together with its Vigo, Orlandi Valuta, Pago Facil and Western Union Business Solutions branded payment services, Western Union provides consumers and businesses with fast, reliable and convenient ways to send and receive money around the world, to send payments and to purchase money orders. As of March 31, 2015, the Western Union, Vigo and Orlandi Valuta branded services were offered through a combined network of over 500,000 agent locations in 200 countries and territories and over 100,000 ATMs and kiosks. In 2014, The Western Union Company completed 255 million consumer-to-consumer transactions worldwide, moving $85 billion of principal between consumers, and 484 million business payments. For more information, visit www.WesternUnion.com.

___________________

1 IFAD, 2009

WU-G

Western Union Press Contact:
Khalid Baddou, +212 522 42 84 02
Khalid.Baddou@westernunion.com