“The basic confrontation which seemed to be colonialism versus anti-colonialism, indeed capitalism versus socialism, is already losing its importance. What matters today, the issue which blocks the horizon, is the need for a redistribution of wealth. Humanity will have to address this question, no matter how devastating the consequences may be.” – Frantz Fanon
The true value and who runs it is proven when the former head of the Commonwealth for decades has been Queen Elisabeth II, which of yesterday put the mantle of leadership to her son Prince Charles of Wales. The Statement from ‘ Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting 2018 – Leaders’ Statement’ said: “We recognise the role of The Queen in championing the Commonwealth and its peoples. The next Head of the Commonwealth shall be His Royal Highness Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales” (Commonwealth, 20.04.2018).
We can also know the perspective the Great Britain has for the organization, as Boris Johnson wrote so clearly in March 2018: “The good news is that when we leave the EU, we will regain the power to sign free trade agreements with our Commonwealth friends, allowing the UK to make the most of thriving markets. Brexit will give us the ability to open a new era of friendship with countries across the world. A key theme of the London summit will be how to boost trade within the Commonwealth. We’ll also discuss how to improve security co-operation and take joint action to protect the world’s oceans, bearing in mind that the Commonwealth includes island states in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and the Caribbean” (Boris Johnson – ‘Commonwealth has key role to play in the bright future for Britain: article by Boris Johnson’ 12.03.2018, Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO)).
It shows that the United Kingdom own problems and issues is key for the Summit. The others are more a circus that the old empire can play into it. That happen and the Commonwealth Declaration on the 20th April 2018 named ‘Declaration on the Commonwealth Connectivity Agenda for Trade and Investment’ part of it says: “We, the Heads of Government representing member countries of the Commonwealth and one third of the world’s population recognise international trade and investment
as an engine for generating inclusive and participative economic growth and a means to deliver the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” (…) “In particular, we recognise the importance of the multilateral trading system in ensuring the integration of small, vulnerable and least developed countries and countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific into the world economy, and welcome initiatives which will support greater and more effective participation of these countries in international trade” (…) “To promote the realisation of these goals, we hereby launch the Commonwealth Connectivity Agenda for Trade and Investment. This Agenda will be guided by the principles that: co-operation should be pragmatic and practical, leading to credible results; take into account regional integration initiatives; take into account the needs of small and vulnerable economies and least developed countries; avoid duplication with initiatives where other organisations are already working; add value in areas of engagement; and adopt a progressive approach towards a long term vision for closer trade and investment ties. It should also recognise the vital role of the private sector in delivering the 2030 Agenda and facilitating the promotion of the blue and green economy” (Commonwealth – ‘Declaration on the Commonwealth Connectivity Agenda for Trade and Investment’ 20.04.2018).
We can see that Boris Johnson’s goals for the Commonwealth Head of Government Meeting (CHOGM) appeared on the last day, yesterday, as this declaration is to anticipate the Commonwealth secretariat and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) will work on this now. To make sure the former Colonies are more connected. Not only to themselves through trade, but also to the United Kingdom. This is to give the United Kingdom bigger trade and partners through the use of the former colonies. To look at it differently, is to be naive. The other agreements is to make the public perception positive, but this here was to grease the wheels of United Kingdom, who are soon losing the trade-agreements through the membership of European Union, because of their silly decision to leave the Union.
We can see that the Commonwealth all benefits the United Kingdom and the others just has a place multi-nationally to be represented, though a loose organization, that isn’t to formal. But is a place to make them look better and get exposure through the perspective of their former colonial master. That is why they still has the inter-connected ministry FCO. It is a reason why even Zimbabwean Non-Governmental Organization was petitions the Department for International Development (DFID), so the former colony could have funds to hold Presidential Candidate National Television Debate before the General Election later in the year.
Well, that was a sidetrack, but very fitting. Because, the Commonwealth, still seems like a UK based organization, where it is all because of the mercy of the UK. The Commonwealth communiques, declarations and the meetings is because of UK leaders. Not because of the Kenyan President wanted it or the Indian one wanted some. We know there are someone even questioning it, the Bangladesh PM has been stating this today:
“LONDON, April 21, 2018 (BSS)- Seeking inclusion of representative from Asia in the High Level Group to review the Commonwealth Secretariat’s Governance, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina yesterday suggested making the Group more representative with inclusion of member states of different regions. “We value the knowledge and expertise of the Secretariat for furthering work of the Commonwealth. However, we believe that views of the member states through appropriate representation, is equally important,” she said” (Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha – ‘PM suggests making CW high-level group more representative’ 21.04.2018).
This is what I started it, and it is made like this because the Commonwealth are made for the needs of United Kingdom, then the second interests. That is why the head of the Commonwealth has to be the Royalty of the UK. Now it is the Prince of Wales, which was nudged in by the Queen. The same happen to Prince Harry, who was appointed by the Queen to become the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador. We can see that the Commonwealth is a UK enterprise. The view can be seen that way, the way the Royal family has key roles and that the FCO is involved. Therefore, the meetings and statements coming from Boris Johnson with everyone he could. Making photo-ups with anyone he could during the CHOGM.
We will clearly see the Commonwealth Secretariat work on the Declaration, especially now that the UK is gearing up for the Brexit and leaving the Union. They need new secure trading partners and what better, than using the informal body of Commonwealth to get trade with. That is what even Johnson has been writing and proves his ideas. That is why he has been so diplomatic and kind with words. Because some of the nations and state leaders he has meet these days, he has written in the past ill-words of their republics and their kind. Therefore, we know he has sudden swift change of interests. That interests being the benefit of London and not of the former colonies.
The Commonwealth seems more like a savior and needed trade-partners right now, because of the problems coming with the loss of the EU membership. FCO and Commonwealth member-states with this declaration are opening for negotiations. Something that Johnson has been hoping for all along. Since he wanted that and hoped that CHOGM would deliver. However, it did that in some respect with the Declaration.
Seemingly again the Commonwealth is made for the benefit of the UK and their needed gains. If it was otherwise, than the Bangladesh PM wouldn’t asked for what she did after the CHOGM. That proves the problems within the Commonwealth Secretariat and with the Declaration itself. Since in that one in question isn’t mentioned even directly in the declaration.
Hope I am wrong, but as long the British Royalty is running it and is the heads of it. Their interests will be in line of London, not being for all the members of the Commonwealth. To think otherwise to be naive. Peace.
“Det er riktig at Norge ikke deltok i selve invasjonen. Bondevik skal ha takk for at han klarte, med god hjelp fra fredsbevegelsen og den norske kirken, å stå i mot presset fra Høyre om å slutte seg til USAs og Storbritannias angrep. Men den ubehagelige sannheten er likevel at norske våpen, norske soldater, norske politikere og norsk næringsliv både direkte og indirekte støttet Irak-krigen” (Borgen, 2016).
Igjen skriver jeg om hva freds-nasjonen Norge bedriver. Vi snakker fred og selger ammunisjon. Vi selger våpen og høyt teknisk utstyr, selv med strenge lover og reguleringer blir likevel militært forsvarmateriell til land som bryter med menneskerettigheter og de verdier som Norge står for. Dette skjer selv om forsvarlige salget skjer til våres allierte i NATO og OECD. Disse kjøper største-delen av materiellet og våpnene. Resterende ender til land som kan stilles spørsmål til. Denne informasjon kom ut og gitt til Stortinget fra Utenriksdepartementet den 10 Juni 2016. Så dette er ikke gammelt nytt, men bør sperre øynene ettersom dette er noe vi gjør for å gjøre verden mindre fredelig.
“Den samlede verdien av eksporten i 2015 var i underkant av 4,2 milliarder kroner, hvorav drøyt 3 milliarder utgjorde salg av militære varer. Av dette utgjorde eksporten av A-materiell om lag 2,8 milliarder og B-materiell ca. 300 millioner kroner. Eksporten av A-materiell økte med 21 % og eksporten av B-materiell falt med 53 % i 2015” (…) “Den samlede verdien av eksporten i 2014 var ca. 3,6 milliarder, og i 2013 beløp den seg til i underkant av 4,3 milliarder kroner. I forhold til i 2014, økte verdien av den totale eksporten med 15 % i 2015. Eksporten av A- og B-materiell økte med til sammen 4 %” (Meld.St. 36, S: 8, 2016).
Norge solgte våpen og forsvarmateriell til Forente Arabisk Emirater både ‘elektronisk utstyr’ totalt: 2287 tonn, ‘billed/videoutstyr’ totalt: 508 tonn. også ‘Ammunisjon tilhørende deler og komponenter samt tilhørende deler og komponenter’ totale 23475 tonn .
I det samme året solgte vi fra Norge til Malaysia både våpen og forsvarmateriell. ‘Glattboret våpen med kaliber 20 mm eller mindre, våpen med kaliber 12,7 mm og lavere samt tilhørende komponenter’ 5280 tonn og ‘Ildledningsutstyr og tilhørende systemer og komponenter’ 58 tonn.
Et annet land som ble solgt til var Oman og dette var ‘Bomber, torpedoer, raketter, missiler og eksplosiver samt tilhørende komponenter’ 10015 tonn.
Det var militære-oppdrag gjort i Norge for oppdrags-land ved å reparere våpen og forsvarmateriell. Det ble reparert materiell fra land som Forente Arabiske Emirater, Jordan, Malaysia og Sør Korea. Det ble levert levert kommunikasjonmateriell for militært bruk til Algerie, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia og Thailand.
Disse landene fikk etterforsyning av forsvarmateriell i år fra Norge: Afganistan, Belize, Israel, Irak, Kuwait, Mali og Sør Sudan.
Noe som er spesielt i rapporten og stusser over at Libya står i tabell 9.2. i Stortingsmeldingen, men har intet direkte eksport til, så hvorfor lagt inn ett mottakerland av forsvarmateriell, men ingen offisielle tall. Dette virker suspekt, resterende land har fått materiell i løpet av tidsperioden 2012 til 2015.
Disse tallene og nasjonene som blir solgt til viser til hvordan ståa er med ‘freds-nasjonen’ Norge. Allerede 1. Mars 2013 skrev jeg en blogg om våpen-regulering og salg. Der man skulle forandre lovene for å gjøre det vanskeligere å videreselge til visse former for problematiske nasjoner og land der en bryter med internasjonale lover og regler; slik som menneskerettigheter og konvensjoner for ‘rettferdig krig’. Dette gjør at lovteksten og skjønnet blir plausibelt. Noen nyanser jeg kritiserte i 2013 og likeså kan idag. Ettersom å selge våpen til Libya, Sør Sudan, Mali, Irak, Belize og Afganistan burde sees på som tvilsomme salg ettersom konflikt og brudd burde eksistere. Dette er noe en freds-nasjon ikke skulle støtte. Selv om Norsk tropper har tidligere vært til stede eller gjort oppdrag som en del Nato i flere nasjoner, der man stille spørsmål om deres oppdrag var rett eller feil. Kan en likevel still spørsmål til fortsettelsen av å selge våpen og forsvarmateriell til konfliktområder ettersom da profitten i Norge er viktigere enn menneskeliv. Peace.
Borgen, Erling – ‘Det norske hykleriet om Irak-krigen’ (08.06.2016) link: http://www.dagbladet.no/kultur/det-norske-hykleriet-om-irak-krigen/60312259
Stortinget – Meld. St.36 (2015-2016) ‘Eksport av forsvarsmateriell fra Norge i 2015, eksportkontroll og internasjonalt ikke-spredningssamarbeid’ (10.06.2016)
THE 2013 STATE OF THE NATION ADDRESS THAT NEVER WAS
The Truth that the President Should Have told Ugandans
1. The tradition of a President delivering a State of the Nation Address was never part of our constitutional tradition until the promulgation of the 1995 Constitution. When this requirement was enshrined in article 101, it was intended that the President, on an annual basis, gives a full account to Ugandan citizens and taxpayers, through their elected representatives, the State of our Nation. The State of the Nation address is therefore an address to appraise the Nation about the state of our democracy, the state of our economy, the state of our socio-economic infrastructure, the state of public service delivery, the state of our military, and the state of our international relations, among others.
2. It is therefore disappointing to see that after 27 years of leading this country, President Museveni would address the Nation and fail to address the issues that are central to the citizens of Uganda. In 2001, he deceived the Nation and wrote in his election manifesto that he was seeking the mandate to lead Uganda for the last term of office. Since then, he has deceived our teachers, our health workers, university professors and all Ugandans. At this rate, deception and corruption could turn out to be the most enduring legacy of his presidency.
3. The President needs to be truthful to Ugandans to the fact that what he calls the 10 strategic bottlenecks is a clear manifestation of his failed leadership. If he failed to end “ideological disorientation” through his Muchaka Muchaka courses, it only means that he is pursuing an ideologically disoriented system. If he hasn’t succeeded in building the pillars of state after 27 years in power, it means that all along he has pursued a wrong strategy. After 27 years at the helm of leadership, he can’t be talking about promoting the private sector or modernizing agriculture or developing the human resources of our country as if he started leading Uganda yesterday. That is being disingenuous.
4. What Mr. Museveni should be telling Ugandans in a State of the Nation Address is what he has done to build the pillars of state, what progress has he made and when does he hope to complete this undertaking? How does the increase in population from 14 million to 35 million constitute the development of human resource capital? The World Bank (2010) projects that at the current level of Mr. Museveni Government’s investment in education, Uganda’s labor force in 2030 will be worse off in terms of education attainment than that of Ghana in 2010 and lower than what South Korea and Malaysia were in 1970. Mr. Museveni’s Government projects to increase its percentage of the labor force with secondary education to 48 percent in the next 20 years by 2030. Malaysia achieved a 60 percent target in 10 years. Ghana has projected to raise its percentage of the labor force with post-primary education from 60 percent in 2010 to 80 percent by 2030.
5. Mr. Museveni has told the story of our economic growth for the last two decades but this is not our main point of contention. What we contested and what he continues to run away from at every State of the Nation Address is what does that growth mean to ordinary Ugandans? What does the 5.1% GDP growth or the size of GDP mean to the 400,000 young men and women that come through our tertiary education system to look for jobs in a jobless market? Out of every 100 youth of this country, 83 of them have no formal employment. What does the increase in revenue collection mean to these youth or how many jobs did his Government create over the last financial year? What does 3.6% inflation mean to hardworking business men and women who have to pay the highest interest rates in this region? How can he pursue monetary and fiscal policies that kill businesses through high interest rates and he calls it strengthening the private sector?
6. We will call upon Parliament, through the Leader of the Opposition, to put the President’s address to more rigorous scrutiny for it to pass for a State of the Nation Address. Parliament voted for over UGX10 trillion to be spent during the financial year ending June 30, 2013. Where is the commencement of works on the railway line that he promised in the last address? Where are the works for the Karuma project? How many kilometers of paved roads did the Government add on the Nation’s road network and what should we expect for the next financial year? How does the President account for the 16 mothers that continue to die every day after the taxpayer and donor money that has been sunk into our health services system?
7. Year after year, Mr. Mueseveni has deceived the country by committing and then failing to increase salaries or improving the working conditions of our teachers, health workers, and the men and women who service in our police services and the armed forces. The lame explanation is that Government has a limited resource envelop and everybody has to be patient by waiting for money from oil. But this Government squandered over UGX500 billions during the CHOGM debacle. A businessman walked away with UGX162 billion for building ghost markets. Without shame, over UGX6 billion meant for buying bicycles for village council leaders was stolen under his watch.
8. Of course if Mr. Museven cared, he would use the opportunity presented by the State of the Nation Address to announce major reforms to cut down the size of his bloated Government and the wastage associated with it, confront the cancer of corruption and channel the resources saved from such reforms to implement programmes that benefit had working Ugandans such as teachers, health workers, and the men and women who serve in our armed forces. On the contrary, he has become an expert, not in solving the problems facing the country, but by blaming others for his failures. Leadership by deception and blaming your failures on others has never been a formula for transformation of Nations.
9. You are all aware that some of our men and women in the UPDF are in faraway lands in Somalia, Central African Republic and elsewhere. These men and women are some of the best of our citizens because they pay the ultimate sacrifice in fighting terror, contributing to our pan African agenda and most importantly, safeguarding our freedoms and our democracy. The State of the Nation Address is a singular opportunity to recognize the sacrifice of these gallant men and women who carry our Nation’s flag in some of the most dangerous and treacherous environments. To fail to recognize their service in a State of the Nation address is to fail the litmus test of what such an address should cover. In any case, Parliament and the country should expect the President to appraise the Nation on the strategic policy goals of these deployments and the exist plan that enables our officers and men to be reunited with their families at an appropriate time.
10. The State of the Nation address is commanded by our Constitution which is the foundation of our emerging democracy. No doubt, there has been checkered progress in our democracy mainly expressed in our ability to hold regular elections. However, the gross imperfections in our democratization process epitomized in the excessive use of money, rampant rigging and election violence are all issues that a President should address in a State of the Nation Address. The increasing onslaught on free speech, the attacks on the media, the continuing harassment of organized civil society and the pushback on progressive and independent minded Members of Parliament are clear manifestations of democratic reversals.
11. Ugandans expected the President to outline the building blocks that his Government intends to pursue to strengthen our democracy enterprise: what is the road map to free and fair elections to 2016? What is the agenda and timeline for electoral reforms? Does the President hope to provide leadership on the restoration of presidential term limits? Does he have a succession plan or doesn’t he see his failure to organize a peaceful transition as putting him squarely in the docket of the previous leaders?
12. It is unfortunate that Mr. Museven’s rule is coming to an end before he is able to comprehend the simple fact that the best way to benchmark a country’s success and transformation is not to benchmark it against the failures of the past or the failures of others. Leaders that help nations achieve transformation benchmark their successes against a shared vision, targets and timeframes.
13. Mr. Museveni has for the last 27 years put more energy in blaming others for his failures rather than focusing on what he should have accomplished given the good will that Ugandans gave him and the resources at his disposal. Let me also remind him that deception, corruption, oppression and intolerance that have become the hallmark of his rule are not a winning formula for achieving socio-economic transformation. Unemployed youth, under resourced public sector workers or traders cannot be teargased into increasing productivity. History has taught us that it is only political and economic freedom that are capable of unleashing the ingenuity of a people to transform a nation. And you don’t need 27 years to learn that. I implore the President to use the remaining 3 years of his presidency to redirect his energies towards pursuing an agenda that strengthens our democracy and growing the economy to create jobs
14. In conclusion, the Forum for Democratic Change will shortly unveil an alternative development agenda aimed at putting our country on a growth trajectory that creates jobs, ensure the dignity of every Uganda and transforms our country.
For God and my Country
Major General (Rtd) Mugisha Muntu
Forum for Democratic Change
(Håper du likte å lese dette til å svare på den forrige saken jeg la ut!).