Who's interests drive the government and politicians in Tanzania?

Politics can sometimes be made a very complex issue while in the real sense they are as simple as anything a person can have an interest on be it culture; religion; sports; education; farming; employment or friendship. To put this in more simple terms, let us look at the language that we often use – whether consciously or unconsciously of the meaning – when we relate to people’s interests in different settings. We often refer to family politics; church politics and also work politics. The simplicity and precise meaning of these politics are clearly understood by everyone even though many cannot give you a direct definition but rather an explanation of what underpins these terms as they refer to. This is more personal and people often look at them at an individual level hence no one can agree to things that would put him or her at a disadvantaged position. This is the case of an individual interest that looks at sole benefit on the issue at hand and solutions to these are not often hard to find since everyone bargains with a live conscious of others.

Contrary to the above, people tend to be more vigilant and selfish when dealing with other peoples interests especially when they have less personal connection with them. This is when the same individuals exercise politics outside consciousness and will less thought on how the other persons feel or would be affected by their actions. The same fathers who know what is good for their wives and children pass a blind eye on the fact that the same interest of safety; good health; better education and a sustainable income his family has are the same for his neighbor and so are many other families. A concept of a zero-sum game tends to be more applied in this setting especially in a democratic context where elected representation (delegated governance?) is used to ensure the same interests are fairly applied / exercised for the benefit of all these collective families. Opportunism and abuse of power then becomes the way of governance especially over poor communities who put their lives in the hands of their sons whom they have raised from rural areas with goat milk, vegetation cemented on the values and norms of ubuntu.

As far as we can recall, there is not a single leader in the African continent that has been raised and groomed by a collective group of elders. There is not even a single president that have been educated out of riches but struggles and sacrifices of whether to eat or not so as to invest in the future of the child. These elders knew exactly the importance of investing in the future of their children and hence they would sacrifice their wellbeing for the benefit of future generations.
This investment has yielded much as most of our legends today went through hardship but with the unending support of their people, they rose with all excellence, wisdom and quality that made them to stay true to their call and mandate of liberating the people from colonialism and to a better life. This is what makes an African leader and a true legend that is praised by all generations! These are the likes of the Nobel Peace Prize holders Albert Luthuli and Nelson Mandela; Julius Nyerere; Samora Machel; Kenneth Kaunda and many others.

These were the first generation of leadership that took over power from the hands of colonialists that have forcefully taken the land from our Kings and Chiefs and destroyed every governance system we had replacing it with the current western concept of governance. They stayed true to their call and had their peoples best interest at heart. They were people’s leaders. So as it may be different people are influenced not only by their backgrounds but also different situations; political; social and economic environment they find themselves in at different points in time.
Not being an expert on leadership, I believe is a leader is a leader by vision hence no true leader can be pressured by any situation to forsake his vision or his people for the sake of personal interests or ambitions. This is what differentiates todays leaders to those I’ve mentioned earlier. These days what matters most is political power more than national development; party popularity more than citizen agency; foreign acceptance more than the will of the people. Politics have become more an issue of gathering support to remain in office more than that being in office for fulfilling needs of the voters; more an issue of control of resources than fair and just distribution of income where those that have access to decision power use it for the benefit of their consumption and those of their fellows. It is no longer an issue of service but that of scrambling; no more an issue of morals but corruptions. This is the soul of African politics that benefits not the nation states and their citizens but the western countries whose governance and economic systems we are consuming. This is all for the benefit of the foreign banks whose sustainability depends on the strengths of the European economies that are built on the foolishness of African men and the blood and sweat of the African mother and child.

Africa as a continent is rich in all sorts of minerals that none of the most western countries have but unfortunately it has been turned to become the worst continent on earth with all sorts of social dysfunctionalities; conflict and ending cycle of debt that guarantees not only it’s dependency to foreign capital but also a burden that has to be yolked on each unborn African child’s shoulders. Since the slave era, Africa as a continent has never experience peace; unity; development and social well being. It’s humanity and welcoming spirit has been taken as a sign of weakeness where its citizens can’t think nor do anything to help themselves and thus sustain themselves as a collective. In turn international laws dictates what systems of governance the continent needs to have and what kind of economic infrastructures they should implement. This imperialism is what each and every new country president needs to bring down to its citizens as a signed international treaty done without the consensus of the people country concerned. Whether for good or for worse that is a debate on its own.

Globalisation is also another issue that like civilization came to Africa not for its benefit but the benefit of the western countries who at all costs saw it benefiting to have the continent as its major market for all sorts of goods and services. As ideal as it is to have a free market that will benefit consumers with variety of products and competitive prices, it should also be noted that this is more beneficial to the people when the playing field is equal. Western countries enjoy the benefit of being the suppliers while the African continent as large is on the receiving end. The imbalance and inequality in this ratio is so huge that each product that comes into this black market, more profits are generated and thus the sustainability of the lives of the northern countries is guaranteed. That’s not the case for Africa.

We don’t own the means of production. We don’t have capacity not the necessary technology or
infrastructure to produce and trade fairly with other countries and not because there are no means nor will to do so but the balance of power in this context makes it impossible to do so. This end is justified by the means on which trade is done between the north and south. The north is interested not in the development of the continent nor building up its capacity to elevate its standard of living but to keep it as a guaranteed source of income for the sustainability of its superiority as the better side of the globe and these are not the things that are allowed to be spoken, especially in African child. Lest we jeopardize our ‘good’ economic relations; foreign investment and the generous donor support that these countries give unto us without any other expectations.

Many would disagree while others agree with some or most of what has been argued here depending on the views and side of the world whom a person is on. You can be a business person whose interests are purely on investment (whatever it is) and a good return on investment and thus believe that any riches and justifiable as long as they are acquired by just means. You can also be arguing that your current economic strength cannot be linked to capital acquired by unjust means during the era of colonialism since you were not part of. Indeed that is a fair argument even though it doesn’t take away the fact that your well being as an individual citizen was made possible through unjust means perpetuated by companies of your countries who paid tax to your government and thus in turn made it possible for you to have a future.

You can be the good Samaritan whose interests are for a just world and hence not support the concept of western imperialism, but the fact still remains that the northern countries whose governments are able to give out donor aid to the south on behalf of the goodwill of their citizens are not immune to the above argument since their companies pay tax to them whether profits are acquired fairly or not. In a subtle way the trade relations that the countries promote are for the benefit of their corporations who in turn do business with those countries concerned. This cycle unfortunately continues to exist as long as the balance of power between the north and the south exists.

You can also be a young African child like myself whose effort and goal in life is to repair the damages of the past; build the present while also fights for a better future where coming generations would live in a continent filled with hope. A struggle for a continent where its people can be able to decide and do what it good for them without foreign imperialism. A struggle where the continent can be able to provide through its worth a breathable atmosphere whose air is unpolluted; a better life through its land that is free from exploitation and environmental damage; a healthy society whose values are built from true humanity and culture undiluted by foreign concept of what an Africa is; an economic viability through its rich deposits that benefit more the people than so called investors and a form of governance whose leaders seek what is best for their people than being agents and custodians foreign nations will.

No matter what your views are; no matter what your opinions are; no matter what your politics are, you have a right to your beliefs as they are true to you as the reflection of your identity. I’m influences by the daily cries of community that was forcefully removed from its land in favour of a foreign investor. I’m influenced by my father who died in war defending his family from being killed by bullets and bombs of militants who killed anyone opposing them in support of a diamonds rooted war. I’m influenced by the struggles of my mother who lost everything while fleeing the country with a pregnant stomach and seven children in search of refuge in a foreign country. I’m influenced by the development of my brothers and sisters whose lives will always be of shame and pity; whole lives are marked with growing under the trees and sleeping under bridges; whose lives are marked with nothing more than bare feet and torn clothes and also whose lives are nothing more than being another futureless African child whose country is rich in minerals. Having said all this, I’m not expecting you to agree with me because of the different frames of references we have.

If my country has together with other countries ratified the United Nations Declaration for Human Rights, why can’t it be allowed its independence from the western imperialism that deprives the citizens their right for a basis of government whose source of strength is the will of its people? Why can’t it be allowed a system of governance whose mission is not to live up to foreign expectations but more what is best for its citizens. The same goes for the Millennium Development Goals. Why can’t it be allowed economic independence than being pressured into a system whose balance of trade favors the north more than its inhabitants? How can the goals ever be realized if the country’s economic system is for the sustainability of the rich while disempowering the poor whose fate is on donor aid more than their own country’s riches and deposits? How can these be achieved while not even the tax base cannot provide food and social security for its people?

If the international politics are so good and so objective and effective, why did apartheid in South Africa take 46years to end while the UN Declaration for Human Rights was ratified the same year as its inception? Why did Ruanda and Burundi wars claim so many millions of innocent people while the international bodies watch? Why must the African citizens continue to suffer extreme poverty while the western population enjoy good life facilitated by their governments with trade relations that has seen not even a single African country develop by itself through its resources?

Now you tell me between the North and the South, who’s interests are at the heart of government? Who’s interests are at the heart of the politicians?

Author:
Mvuyisi April
4 November 2009

Link: http://www.polity.org.za/article/whose-interests-drive-the-government-and-politicians-in-tanzania-2009-11-04

Is it worth it??

The Price of Gold!!

The Price of Gold!... is it worth it?

On Wednesday night the Channel Ten had a special broadcast on human rights violations that have been going on since early 2003 in some of the rural villages on Tanzania. These gross human rights violations due to gold mining ranged from killings of people and animals burnt by acidic water; destruction of farming land and vegetation to polution of the environment due to dumping of chemical waste from the mining operations.

Since the mining operations started in the northern regions of the country, the local communities have experienced an unending cycle of catastrophe. They were since forcefully removed from the homes by the state police, houses demolished and people burried alive in that process. Those that remained continue to suffer all sorts of destructions in favour of mining operations that benefit none of them. The government is silent!

For sometime mining dumps have been pilling up at the back of their homes; rivers being polluted living them, their animals and crops without water to survive and many of those who unknowingly used the rivers and wells were burnt to death; some suffered severe skin disorders due to the acid that also distroyed most vegetations. The cattle and dogs that drank the water lost their skins while some of the goats burnt their limbs off by stepping on the water.

Unfortunately all these cries have fallen into deaf ears. For years now there has never been satisfactory measures taken by government to respond to these issues and the mining operations have gained more power to do what they do claiming that they have not signed any agreement with the people nor their legal representative, hence won't account for anything. The corporations continue to export gold work billions of dollars while the tax they pay to the country cannot even build a single village they distroyed and most notably their staff earn salaries that could take upto 500years for an average Tanzanian to accumulate!

Now objectively looking at all these injustices....is it really worth it for this country to have these operations?? What is the benefit of investments if their presence in a community is nothing but destruction of peoples lives?? Is the price of gold more valuable than human lives?? If the nation would closely look at its suffering like this.....is it really worth it??

Tanzanians is this the price you are willing to pay? On who's cost? It really worth it??

Tanzanians are more cursed than blessed!!

Being born and bread in a village full of minerals is not a blessing for the people of Tanzania. For the majority of people in this country, minerals have for years become a guaranteed source of pain, destruction of lives and the environment than the Creator originally intended them to be. This is the life and future of each Tanzanian child that is born in the villages surrounded by gold rich mines.

Since the discovery of gold in Tanzania about a decade ago, giant mining companies from both North and Southern Countries have benefitted immensely in the operations while thousands of indigenous subsistence miners have gone jobless. In addition to being brutally evicted from their homes and buried alive, other additional costs that the locals have borne in places like Shinyanga are huge holes in the environment which have translated into a series of unaccountable mining dumps; polluted rivers; destruction of vegetation and alleged corruption in government which has been clearly seen in the lack of transparency to contracts awarded to mining companies and tax revenues.

Between the years 1995 - 2005 gold exports from Tanzania have increased to US$2.54 billion with AngloGold Ashanti taking US$1.54 billion in their previous financial year while giving back a mean 3% royalty tax for the huge costs that the people of Tanzania continue to suffer with. Local organisations like the Policy Forum (PF); Lawyer’s Environmental Action Team (LEAT) and other have taken up the people’s matter to themselves while being backed by the Christian Council of Tanzania (CCT); Tanzania Episcopal Conference (TEC) and Baraza Kuu la Waislamu Tanzania but to this day the plight of the people in these villages remain and their cries have fallen in deaf ears. Many believe that the gold revenues in Tanzania could be able to solve most of the problems facing the country and be able to finance the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (MKUKUTA). Some analysts have predicted a tripling income in the mining sector from $100million to $300million by 2014 while veteran activists for economic justice differ with this as just another government-shut-your-mouth incentive compared to what the mining companies make from the country’s minerals.

Today on the Tanzanian Budget Day, the World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors has approved an International Development Association credit of USD190 million to support implementation of Tanzania’s National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (MKUKUTA). This loan aimed at financing the government budget was reduced from an initial indicative of USD200 million and will unfortunately be spent without transparency to the rest of the population as it has always been with other revenue generating means like tax revenues.

Despite a decline in Tanzania’s ranking on the Cost of Doing Business and on the World Competitiveness indicators; the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability assessment and the UK Department for International Development’s Public Financial Management risk assessment having downgraded Tanzania; its ranking by Transparency International fallen; and the 2008 Country Policy and Institutional Assessment rating, though still relatively high at 3.8, has also been revised downward by 0.1 points. Progress on the government’s main private sector development and public financial reform programs has been rated unsatisfactory by development partners as have two other core reforms, namely legal and local government. (Business Desk: 11 June 2009).

“Every year we see increased poverty and under development while parliamentarians get new German imported cars with the old ones still in excellent conditions. This clearly shows that the where the heart of government is...not in the people but themselves.” said one of the citizens.

As one of the custodians of the Millenium Development Goals which the MKUKUTA programme seeks to achieve, Tanzania is expected to deliver on its undertakings by 2015 but with the huge dependency in debt from World Banks, of which most will go to politicians luxurious benefits, none of these goals will be met. Minerals in Tanzania are not for Tanzanians benefit but the countries and their citizens whose mining companies operate in Tanzania including Britain; Canada and South Africa. As indicated by the Mining Agreement between Pangea Minerals Limited (a subsidiary of Barrick Gold Corporation) and the government of the Republic of Tanzania for the development of a gold mine at Buzwagi, Kahama, ”...it is of extraordinary benefit to Barrick while offering decidedly little to Tanzanians.

The questions still remains as to whether the current cut in the mining sector is fair to the ordinary Tanzanian citizen whom on average would take 500years to make up the US$9.4million salary package, a Barrick CEO Greg Wilkins earns. Can the country be able to provide enough and adequate basic services for its citizens? Can mining ever be accountable if the legislation favours them more than the citizens that voted the government to office? Will the revenue collected ever be able to repair the damages and costs borne by the local communities if the mines can’t even allow them the opportunity to generate income by provide services to them, more over compensating them for their loss of lives.

Are foreign loans as granted today by the World Bank the way to meet the needs of the ordinary Tanzanian? Are they not a guarantee of a continous cycle of debt that even the yet to be born child will have a burden to pay? Are we as a country so kind and generous to give away what is supposed to sustain our children and our future generations – our only inheritance – to rich countries in exchange for loss of lives and poverty? Or we just didn’t see it coming?

Am intersted to know!

Author:
Mvuyisi April

Link: http://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=23066 

Africa's misery...

A Golden Opportunity?

By Damon Vis
-Dunbar21 November 2008

Tanzania is losing large amounts of money from foreign investment in the mining sector due to low royalty rates and generous tax exemptions, while contracts with so-called stabilization clauses have locked the government into this tax regime for up to 50 years, says a report published by a consortium of church-based groups. Tanzania, Africa’s third largest producer of gold, but also one of the world’s poorest countries, has seen its gold mining industry swell in the last ten years thanks to the introduction of a variety of investment incentives. But Tanzania’s mineral investment laws are too liberal, robbing the country of potential revenue, argue the authors of A Golden Opportunity? How Tanzania is Failing to Benefit from Gold Mining.

In written responses to the report, two mining companies operating in Tanzania have countered that Tanzania’s investment incentives are “conventional” and “essential” if the country is to draw long-term investment to the mining sector. The report takes aim at a host of tax incentives—allowing companies to offset a 100% of their capital expenditure, for example—that the authors argue amount to hidden subsidies. Higher royalties are also recommended. The government currently levies a 3% royalty on gold. If the rate was 5%, the same that Botswana charges, Tanzania would have netted an extra US$ 58 million over the last five years, estimate the report’s authors, Mark Curtis and Tundu Lissu. The report also alleges that mining companies have evaded taxes, pointing to a 2003 audit commissioned by the government of Tanzania from the American firm Alex Stewart Assayers Government Business Corporation (ASA). The audit has not been made public, and the audited mining companies say that they have not seen the final report, although a copy has been leaked to the news media and was obtained by Kurtis and Lissu. According to Kurtis and Lissu’s description of auditor’s report, four companies are alleged to have over-declared losses by US$502 million between 1999 and 2003, representing a loss in government revenue of US$132.5 million. The auditors also reportedly complained of thousands of missing documents and accused the mining companies of frustrating their investigation. Tanzania’s government revenue from mining has been placed at between US$13 to US$36 million a year by various sources.

The authors of the report say it is likely about US$ 28 million, the figure provided by the Tanzanian Chamber of Mines. Notably, efforts to boost government revenue in the mining sector may be hampered by the contracts that Tanzania has negotiated with foreign mining companies. While these contracts are normally kept confidential, occasionally they are leaked. Such was the case with a 2007 agreement with Barrick, a Canadian company, for a new mining operation in the north of Tanzania.According to Kurtis and Lissu, the contract commits the government to maintain current tax levels for 25 years, with an option for the company to renew for another 25 years on the same terms. Compensation is guaranteed under contract should the government change the terms in such a way that the company is put “in a worse off situation”. Barrick, the mining company, has dismissed Kurtis and Lissu’s report as “basically an advocacy piece by a hired Tanzanian anti-mining activist which encourages the Government of Tanzania to extract much higher taxes, rents, and royalties from Tanzania’s nascent gold mining industry irrespective of its impacts on that industry, or the benefits that flow from it.”

In a three-page response sent to the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, Barrick says that Tanzania’s nascent mining industry has required large upfront investments from foreign mining companies, suggesting that the investment incentives have been necessary to attract foreign capital. Nor are Tanzania’s mineral investment laws out of step with the rest of the world, said Barrick, adding that Tanzania’s royalty rate is higher than those imposed in Australia, Canada, the United States, South Africa and China—the world’s largest gold producers. At a time when the mining industry is feeling the effect of lower mineral prices, “the authors proposed changes in law to make the Tanzanian investment climate vastly less attractive couldn’t possible be any insensitive to global economic reality,” wrote Barrick.

A Golden Opportunity? How Tanzania is Failing to Benefit From Gold Mining was commissioned by the Christian Council of Tanzania, the National Council of Muslims in Tanzania, the Tanzania Episcopal Conference, and financed by Norwegian Church Aid and Christian Aid.

A link to the report, as well as responses from the mining companies Barrick and Anglogold Ashanti, are available from the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre at http://www.business-humanrights.org/Links/Repository/608500