Opinion: A junta stays a junta

“Breaking News: Colonel Assimi Göita takes over as President of Mali , Interim President and Prime Minister dismissed Less than 48 hours after dismissing the Interim President of the transition, Bah N’Daw, and his Prime Minister, Moctar Ouane, Colonel Assimi Goïta becomes the new President of the transition. Col Assimi Goïta says President Bah Ndaw and PM Moctar Ouane failed in their duties and were seeking to sabotage the country’s transition. On Wednesday, May 26, Bah N’Daw submitted his resignation and that of his Prime Minister to the man who had previously been his Vice President. The government, whose composition had been unveiled on 24 May a few hours before the military coup, was dissolved” (Red Lion Media, 26.05.2021).

There are sometimes the reality have to hit hard. There is sometimes a need to address things the way they are. This isn’t only for what’s happening in Bamako, but elsewhere. Let’s be clear. A junta stays a junta. No matter, if you appoint a civilian or a few technocrats to a “council” or a “cabinet” doesn’t make it a civilian government. It is still a junta government and the military is still in-charge.

That is what is happening these days in Bamako. This is what’s been happening in N’Djamena, Naypyidaw and Khartoum for instance. They have military government or junta’s, which Merriam-Webster defines like this: “a council or committee for political or governmental purposes especially : a group of persons controlling a government especially after a revolutionary seizure of power” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary – ‘Junta’ 26.May 2021).

We shouldn’t be shocked that Colonel Göita takes over power. That he sacks the ones who appointed a new cabinet without communicating or taking the CNSP into account. This is why the colonel did his second coup within a year. He used the army to topple the previous President and now he toppled another one. That’s because the civilians and the ones in transition didn’t follow the orders or act within the range of the military leadership.

This is just an act of an junta. Just because the junta appointed a former defence minister to President and allowed another civilian to become the Prime Minister. The main part of government was run by military commanders. This is why the underlings are still only there to create another image and be there to make the regime more feasible. The military leaders have no plans to leave power or give it away. They took power and has only selfish reasons to stay in office.

The junta will stay a junta. This will be the deal in Mali, Tchad, Sudan and Burma. These regimes are like this and they will not be accountable to anyone. They might seek to have some civilians within the transitional government or council. Just to make it legit and easily to sell to the international community.

It is just army commanders who wants to be the Executive and the Head of State. That is the reality. They didn’t need to win an election or get popular. These folks just used the guns and took power with their profession. The CNSP, the Sovereign Council and others are doing the same. They are boosting a transition. Hoping people are forgetting who they are and what sort of role they play. Putting in a few lucky technocrats (civilians) masking the cabinet/council. While promising after a long while to turn it into a civilian government.

The army says it saved the nation from corrupt individuals, tyrants and unpopular heads of state. The price is making them kings without any election. That’s why this is junta’s and they act like junta’s. We shouldn’t be surprised and just go after a few, but all of them. They are all using the mighty army in their favour. Instead of getting a government, which represent the general public in their republic.

We can either accept the trick or talk about it sincerely. Since, this isn’t a case only for Bamako. It is a problem and a way of governing, which happens across the world. Where the military and army commanders take control of the governing bodies and becomes the Head of State.

If you throw shade at Göita, do the same to General Kaka, President Al-Burhan and all the other fellas who has taken power this way. There is no difference, other than the way they have played it and making “mechanisms” for a transition. Which in the end favours them and gives them an advantage for a future election. That is it really.

A junta stays a junta. It doesn’t matter if they give a few plum jobs to a few technocrats. They are still army commanders running government and without a popular mandate from the public. Peace.

Opinion: The “benevolent dictator” term need to be eradicated

There been plenty of times, long-term dictators has been written as a “benevolent dictator”. Benevolent means that your being organized for the purpose of doing good. That indirectly means the organization of the dictator is done for the purpose of doing good. That is where I have a trouble with it.

I don’t believe it, neither see it fit to deem a person deemed as a dictator as good. That is because its easy to say their actions are not good, neither their results. They might have now and then done some positive policies, regulations and budgets. The timelines of their reign might show some progress and some positive actions. However, that should be undermined by their destruction of civil society, their total control of the political sphere and their de-institutionalize of the states they run. As it is run by their decree and their “high above” orders. Which can go from securing a well in a far-away village to make a political enemy “stop”.

Therefore, the knowledge of the control, the extent of misuse of power and militarized the government. The state isn’t there to safeguard the public any-more. Neither is the state their to secure welfare for all. The dictator is building the state around the small fraction and elites the dictator trust. The dictator are securing allies and cronies. Not building for the grander good and with that sense. It is hard to see how the dictator can be deemed fit as benevolent.

The only ones calling a dictator benevolent is the ones who needs an ally. They need a big-man in a region and someone they can point at. To say, we donated funds to this guy, we uses his army and his folks to rebuild. We are showing the donations and the results by backing this guy. That is why they are transcribing positive features. Because, they need to have a point-man far away. Someone, they can make a hero, even when its a cruel tyrant. Since he has a running hospital and a factory in the suburb of the Capital. Still, the rural areas are as struggling as they were at independence. Only vast difference is the amounts of pictures of the dictator and they have some more houses with electricity.

This is just the way it is. The people can die because of the greed of the President and dictator. The people can be hunted down and destroyed if they go against the dictator. Still, at the end of the day. Someone can call him benevolent. Which is a total cognitive dissonance, as you cannot be running an evil and be kind at the same time. The same well cannot pump both water and wine. It either gives you wine from the cellar or water from the source. It is that simple.

A dictator is not their for the common good. The purpose is to stay in power by any means. No matter what the person destroys, how it undermines the civil society and how it misuse its power and resources. That is what a dictator does, the dictator only smiles and develops something. If there is something to gain or a favour down the line. Therefore, the kindness of the dictator is only done for personal reasons. Not done for building a functioning welfare state. A functioning welfare state wouldn’t have a dictator, because the citizens wouldn’t be tricked to have one. The dictator couldn’t manipulate the institutions and the civil service.

That is just the way it is. A dictator needs weak institutions and a militarized society to take a solid grip of power. Also, have the ability to incite fear and manipulate every situation to its favour. That is why its hard to believe people address these cunning actions as “good”. Peace.

When the Henchmen takes over from the Dictators: It doesn’t get better!

I’m just seeing with time that the fall of dictators, that its not enough. As long as the President and former Head of State has fallen, it supposed to be different. Apparently, it needs another push after that. These people who has been the Executive, the Commander-in-Chief has had the army behind them. The leaders have used huge patronage, bribery and tricks to stay in power. These gentlemen has used all sorts of pay-to-play to keep people at bay, they have misused the authority and also used the military to keep the fear in the population.

These men continues with that, they use all methods, there is nothing that stops them to stay there. They change laws, they uses the military to stop opposition, they get enemies into exile and if not assassinated. There is no extend to their powers, while in office. They eat the state funds and cripples the economy. Even though they do this, they have loyal bases and uses the various state sponsored armed forces against the population to make them fear them and not go against the dictator.

Even with all of this, the dictator has people around to follow his orders. This is generals, commanders and politicians whose all eating of his plate. They know how to operate and knows how to control the population. They will prolong the same structures and methods to keep power after the fall of dictator. We are now seeing this two places especially.

In Zimbabwe, it is still more of the same there as the previously dictator and President Robert Mugabe stepped down. After the coup that wasn’t a coup, but later it was actually a coup d’etat. The current leadership is doing more of the same. They are arresting civil society activists, NGOs are getting into trouble and the economy is tanking. The Economy filled with US Dollars and not even working with RTGS Dollars or the Mobile Money serviced. The ZANU-PF of today isn’t acting different than under Mugabe. Only adding scarfs and Mnangagwa as the head.

In Sudan, the former 30 years of Omar Al-Bashir is still continuing with the TMC. They are killing demonstrators in Darfur, they are killing people close to the sit-in Khartoum. It is not changing and the negotiations with Forces of the Freedom and Change Declaration (FFCD), which the Sudanese Professional Association is a key organization off. Certainly, they are continuing to demonstrate, as they are fighting for a civilian rule. Something the TMC and the former henchmen of Bashir not accepting. Because that is not fitting their position and they don’t want to give way.

The ZANU-PF and the TMC will continue where Mugabe and Bashir left off. They are not changing society, they are not willingly to step-up and give the public another type of leadership. Because, that means their time is over. That means the army, the juntas are over. This means the state will have to operate differently and with other characters than off today. In the end, that means the state will have other type of leaders than right now.

The ZANU-PF haven’t reformed or really changed much since the fall of Mugabe. They are more of the same. The state is still acting as in the past. It isn’t doing nothing of constructive changes, only than making committees to hire cronies.

The TMC have had shorter time, but they have still the generals and war-lords of Bashir in the near proximity of power. The Janjaweed (Rapid Support Force) is attacking the dissidents and protesters. The TMC is not really making any fruitful dialogue with the FFCD or SPA. They are trying more to stall for time, while hoping the revolution dies off. As the TMC has gotten financial aide to continue their rule. These is the same men, that kept Bashir in Power.

As long as the henchmen of the dictators lingers in power. They will not reform the state, they will use the same force to stay. Peace.

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

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.

Grådighetens mange ansikt

I disse dager, i nedgangstider viser det seg veldig. Ikke at det er spektakulært. Det er slik at vi lever i et kapitalistisk system. For at et slikt system skal fungere må noen tjene penger. Andre tjene mindre. Noe selge billig, andre dyrere. Dette er en realitet alle ser og tenker som realistisk. Det som er problemet at noen ting bør enten være statstyrt eller ordnet igjennom andre organer som forsikrer samfunnet tilgang til nødvendige produkter og tjenester.

Det er derfor vi har SAS, derfor har vi latt SAS bli det som vi idag kjenner som SAS.  Del-eide av staten og som har reiser til de mest gudsforlatte plasser i Norge, hvor ingen lavprisselskap ville ha dratt. Fordi det ikke hadde vært penger i dette. Slik er det også i Sverige og Danmark. Skandinaviske samarbeidsprosjekt som nesten har havarert i jevne mellomrom.  Ikke nok med at de har over nyttår eller rundt juletider sparket to tusen ansatte. Sjefene gav seg selv store bonuser. De pålagt samtidig å kutte lønnen til de ansatte med mellom 10 – 20 %. Noe som er mye. Veldig mye. Lønninger som er blitt forhandlet etter en årrekke. Jeg håper for all del at de som er piloter er godt betalt. Fordi jeg vil ikke ha en pilot som tenker på om han har nok penger til nisten eller husleia. Den personen skal være trygt økonomisk. Det burde også vare banepersonell og ansatte som sjekker at lufta er trygg til å ta av i. Derfor er jeg redd, når ansatte må og mer streve. Å lederne forsatt har skyhøye lønninger.

SAS viser sin grådighet. Ikke minst også vise litt nøysomhet og ære. Fordi deres image er ødelagt for alltid. De har ved flere anledninger vist lite nytenking for den nye konkurransen. Ikke minst også deres uansvarlige betaling av deres ledelse.

Det er flere eksempler,  Findus. En internasjonal matvareprodusent av rang. Har i all beskjedenhet hatt det moro med sin produksjon av lasagne. Lasagne pleier å inneholde en form for kjøttdeig, gjerne av storfe eller svin. I dette tilfelle har de blandet i hestekjøtt. Noe som blir sett på som urimelig, selv om det var for produsenten sett som direkte besparelse.  Noe som begynte i Irland og har senere spredd seg. Akkurat som de gifte bolig boblene og økte gjelds-tyngde banker uten råd om hvordan de skulle dekke tapene. Akkurat likt er det med Findus. Meste av det viser kynisme og kapitalistiske synet. Gir rom for å ta sjanser for kjappe sedler.

Det har skjedd i Norge også. Solvinge kyllingkjøttdeig som måtte trekkes tilbake og hvis du har kjøpt må kastes. Man kan da ha naturlig skepsis til hvorfor dette hender og hva som egentlig er grunnen. Har de tuklet noe nevne verdi for å presse prisen? Ingen rapporter viser til noe spesielt. Jeg har bare grunn til å tvile inntil noe er bevist.

Elkjøp vil holde oppe på alle søndager. Ikke nok med at vi har Brustad-buer. Som gjør at dagligvarer kan være åpne. Vi kan handle alle de seks andre dagene.  Så grådighet viser ingen grenser. Vi har bensin-stasjoner, restauranter   Brustad-buer og kiosker. Dette burde holde i massevis. Det burde ikke være nødvendig med mer.  Vi har tross alt mandag til lørdag. Trenger vi å kjøpe ny TV på søndagen? Når vi kan like lett gjøre det etter jobb på mandagen!

Som disse sakene viser, viser de ankerpunkt på grådighet. At kapitalismen er kynisk og gjør mennesker grisk. Vi blir egoet. Selskapene blir ego, i et evig kretsløp etter markedsandeler og flere målgrupper å nå. Gjør at selskaper som bare produserer en vare til plutselig alt fra sokker til sjampo. Derfor ser jeg mange ansikter og tenker. Hvilket ansikt vil jeg se idag eller i morgen. Kanskje det vil gå utover Telenor i Burma/Myanmar, de betaler vel noen korrupte høytstående junta ledere for å komme inn i markedet(dette er bare noe jeg kan gjette vil være på agendaen om ett par måneder). Slik som Statoil betalte korrupte sjefer i Iran og Aserbajdsjan  Derfor, tiden vil vise og narren vil alt gjøre gjøn. Ønsker deg en god dag vider i kapitalistiske verden videre.

Siste min lille bønn:

Å måtte Gud skjenke nåde over oss og tilgi oss for vår grådighet. Amen.