Africa remembers her sovereignity selectively
Mar 23, 2005
THE former pop star, of Boomtown Rat’s fame, Bob Geldof (also known as Sir Bob or Saint Bob) is not a very popular man in some very powerful quarters in Uganda these days.
Dr. Tajudeen
THE former pop star, of Boomtown Rat’s fame, Bob Geldof (also known as Sir Bob or Saint Bob) is not a very popular man in some very powerful quarters in Uganda these days.
There is nothing new in that because even in the Irish republic where he was born and in Britain where he made his pop name and was later Knighted by the British Queen, not for his pop music but for inspiring the Band Aid appeal that caught global attention in 1984 in response to the Ethiopian famine, he is not universally popular.
He has earned a well-deserved reputation for being a loud-mouth (and here I should declare a potential personal conflict of interest because my mouth does not often have a stopper too), rubbing people the wrong way and ruffling all available feathers in his now famous crusade against hunger, debt and poverty in Africa. I have had occasion to observe that he sometimes appears to be mourning more than the bereaved.
But which champion of lost causes worth that title will not admit to zealotry and singular determination to use every opportunity to make their case?
If there is a Guinness book of records entry for using expletives without caring whether to president or prisoner, diplomat or peasants, that are listening, Bob Geldof should be a runaway winner. It is part of his stock in trade. Sometimes his theatrics actually stand in the way of the message he has which makes many to accuse him of either insatiable individualism or petulant exhibitionism.
I have had one or two run-in with him where it was bull**** for bull****. But his publicity tactics have worked well for him because whatever he says often gets global attention. And so it was typical of him to fly off the handle, go against the grain, throw away the script at the launching of the Blair Commission for Africa two weeks ago and send verbal missiles in an aside about President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and his worst kept secret attempt to tinker with the constitution of Uganda and lift the restriction on fixed two terms for the presidency so that he could stand again. Ekisanja has now reached global media. Thanks to Geldof asking Museveni to move over.
Not unexpectedly, the Ekisanja supporters have been up in arms decrying his impertinence: how dare he
interferes in our sovereign affairs? What does this foreigner, a musician for that matter, (some say with
angry disbelief), know about Uganda to be asking ‘Mzee’ to step aside?
The uproar culminated in an obviously orchestrated demonstration by supporters of the President on Monday condemning Geldof’s brash pronouncement. While they were at it, they also had non-diplomatic words for the British government for meddling in Uganda’s affairs.
The UK High Commissioner to Uganda has been grumbling rather too loudly recently and also a recent statement by a British Foreign Office junior minister voiced concerns about Uganda’s transition to a genuine multiparty democracy.
According to press reports, there were many placards and slogans on display. They were broadly nationalistic, anti-imperialist, very Pan-Africanist and anti-neo-colonialism. But one in particular caught my attention: it said, “Yes to Aid but No to foreign intervention! While Bob Geldof may not be surprised (and would have been disappointed if people were indifferent to his remarks) at attacks on him, I am not sure how he would react to a planned demonstration today by anti-Museveni, anti-Third term and opposition supporters or activists in his support. They must be hoping they can enlist his support as veteran global publicist for their local cause of preventing Museveni from succeeding himself. To Bob’s crusade to feed starving Africans, the Ugandan opposition is adding delivery of democracy too! The bad news is that only recently, Geldof in yet another choreographed outburst, openly said he was tired of being regarded as “Mr Bloody Africaâ€. However, maybe he can downsize to become Mr Uganda democrat or Terminator of “Sad Termâ€!
The banner that said “Yes to Aid but no to foreign intervention†exposes the self-inflicted humiliating contradiction confronting many African leaders. They expect foreigners to build their roads, feed their people, construct their stadiums, hospitals and other development investments but at the same time want
to assert their independence. Uganda is a country talked up as a success story, one of the periodic
“miracles†of Africa throughout the 1990s though it is fast losing its shine to new “miracles†like
Mozambique. Yet its budget and development plans are more than 50% dependent on foreigners. How sustainable is this in the long-run?
It would be ridiculous for those paying the piper not to want to dictate the tune. After all, those
who attended the Ekisanja demonstration must report back to those who provided them with the logistics,
facilitation and the sodas that followed their successful mission to Parliament Avenue. As it is with individuals, so it is with states and between states where the stakes are much higher.
African governments are prepared to sign away the national economy, without referendum or even perfunctory consultation yet when it comes to some very narrowly defined convenient political issues like
our obligation to continue to choose them, they suddenly declare the people are sovereign. What kind of sovereignty and selective empowerment is this that does not allow you to decide the way your national resources are managed (or mismanaged)? They go to IMF/World Bank without consultation.
They fight wars without consultation but when they have problems with their donor-friends then they remember sovereignty, self-determination and Pan- Africanism. Otherwise they are proud to be seen with their powerful friends from Europe and America. It is like wannabe African-Americans who only remember they are Black when they are in big trouble. Remember OJ Simpson? Now look at Michael Jackson.
Where were those now carrying the banner of non-interference when Uganda and Rwanda tragically fought each other, three times, in the DRC and both Presidents and their Executive entourage travel to Auntie Clare in London to settle their differences!
Like Wole Soyinka challenged Leopold Sedar Senghor of Senegal, the apostle of Negritude, a tiger need not proclaim its tigeritude’.
THE former pop star, of Boomtown Rat’s fame, Bob Geldof (also known as Sir Bob or Saint Bob) is not a very popular man in some very powerful quarters in Uganda these days.
There is nothing new in that because even in the Irish republic where he was born and in Britain where he made his pop name and was later Knighted by the British Queen, not for his pop music but for inspiring the Band Aid appeal that caught global attention in 1984 in response to the Ethiopian famine, he is not universally popular.
He has earned a well-deserved reputation for being a loud-mouth (and here I should declare a potential personal conflict of interest because my mouth does not often have a stopper too), rubbing people the wrong way and ruffling all available feathers in his now famous crusade against hunger, debt and poverty in Africa. I have had occasion to observe that he sometimes appears to be mourning more than the bereaved.
But which champion of lost causes worth that title will not admit to zealotry and singular determination to use every opportunity to make their case?
If there is a Guinness book of records entry for using expletives without caring whether to president or prisoner, diplomat or peasants, that are listening, Bob Geldof should be a runaway winner. It is part of his stock in trade. Sometimes his theatrics actually stand in the way of the message he has which makes many to accuse him of either insatiable individualism or petulant exhibitionism.
I have had one or two run-in with him where it was bull**** for bull****. But his publicity tactics have worked well for him because whatever he says often gets global attention. And so it was typical of him to fly off the handle, go against the grain, throw away the script at the launching of the Blair Commission for Africa two weeks ago and send verbal missiles in an aside about President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and his worst kept secret attempt to tinker with the constitution of Uganda and lift the restriction on fixed two terms for the presidency so that he could stand again. Ekisanja has now reached global media. Thanks to Geldof asking Museveni to move over.
Not unexpectedly, the Ekisanja supporters have been up in arms decrying his impertinence: how dare he
interferes in our sovereign affairs? What does this foreigner, a musician for that matter, (some say with
angry disbelief), know about Uganda to be asking ‘Mzee’ to step aside?
The uproar culminated in an obviously orchestrated demonstration by supporters of the President on Monday condemning Geldof’s brash pronouncement. While they were at it, they also had non-diplomatic words for the British government for meddling in Uganda’s affairs.
The UK High Commissioner to Uganda has been grumbling rather too loudly recently and also a recent statement by a British Foreign Office junior minister voiced concerns about Uganda’s transition to a genuine multiparty democracy.
According to press reports, there were many placards and slogans on display. They were broadly nationalistic, anti-imperialist, very Pan-Africanist and anti-neo-colonialism. But one in particular caught my attention: it said, “Yes to Aid but No to foreign intervention! While Bob Geldof may not be surprised (and would have been disappointed if people were indifferent to his remarks) at attacks on him, I am not sure how he would react to a planned demonstration today by anti-Museveni, anti-Third term and opposition supporters or activists in his support. They must be hoping they can enlist his support as veteran global publicist for their local cause of preventing Museveni from succeeding himself. To Bob’s crusade to feed starving Africans, the Ugandan opposition is adding delivery of democracy too! The bad news is that only recently, Geldof in yet another choreographed outburst, openly said he was tired of being regarded as “Mr Bloody Africaâ€. However, maybe he can downsize to become Mr Uganda democrat or Terminator of “Sad Termâ€!
The banner that said “Yes to Aid but no to foreign intervention†exposes the self-inflicted humiliating contradiction confronting many African leaders. They expect foreigners to build their roads, feed their people, construct their stadiums, hospitals and other development investments but at the same time want
to assert their independence. Uganda is a country talked up as a success story, one of the periodic
“miracles†of Africa throughout the 1990s though it is fast losing its shine to new “miracles†like
Mozambique. Yet its budget and development plans are more than 50% dependent on foreigners. How sustainable is this in the long-run?
It would be ridiculous for those paying the piper not to want to dictate the tune. After all, those
who attended the Ekisanja demonstration must report back to those who provided them with the logistics,
facilitation and the sodas that followed their successful mission to Parliament Avenue. As it is with individuals, so it is with states and between states where the stakes are much higher.
African governments are prepared to sign away the national economy, without referendum or even perfunctory consultation yet when it comes to some very narrowly defined convenient political issues like
our obligation to continue to choose them, they suddenly declare the people are sovereign. What kind of sovereignty and selective empowerment is this that does not allow you to decide the way your national resources are managed (or mismanaged)? They go to IMF/World Bank without consultation.
They fight wars without consultation but when they have problems with their donor-friends then they remember sovereignty, self-determination and Pan- Africanism. Otherwise they are proud to be seen with their powerful friends from Europe and America. It is like wannabe African-Americans who only remember they are Black when they are in big trouble. Remember OJ Simpson? Now look at Michael Jackson.
Where were those now carrying the banner of non-interference when Uganda and Rwanda tragically fought each other, three times, in the DRC and both Presidents and their Executive entourage travel to Auntie Clare in London to settle their differences!
Like Wole Soyinka challenged Leopold Sedar Senghor of Senegal, the apostle of Negritude, a tiger need not proclaim its tigeritude’.
THE former pop star, of Boomtown Rat’s fame, Bob Geldof (also known as Sir Bob or Saint Bob) is not a very popular man in some very powerful quarters in Uganda these days.
There is nothing new in that because even in the Irish republic where he was born and in Britain where he made his pop name and was later Knighted by the British Queen, not for his pop music but for inspiring the Band Aid appeal that caught global attention in 1984 in response to the Ethiopian famine, he is not universally popular.
He has earned a well-deserved reputation for being a loud-mouth (and here I should declare a potential personal conflict of interest because my mouth does not often have a stopper too), rubbing people the wrong way and ruffling all available feathers in his now famous crusade against hunger, debt and poverty in Africa. I have had occasion to observe that he sometimes appears to be mourning more than the bereaved.
But which champion of lost causes worth that title will not admit to zealotry and singular determination to use every opportunity to make their case?
If there is a Guinness book of records entry for using expletives without caring whether to president or prisoner, diplomat or peasants, that are listening, Bob Geldof should be a runaway winner. It is part of his stock in trade. Sometimes his theatrics actually stand in the way of the message he has which makes many to accuse him of either insatiable individualism or petulant exhibitionism.
I have had one or two run-in with him where it was bull**** for bull****. But his publicity tactics have worked well for him because whatever he says often gets global attention. And so it was typical of him to fly off the handle, go against the grain, throw away the script at the launching of the Blair Commission for Africa two weeks ago and send verbal missiles in an aside about President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and his worst kept secret attempt to tinker with the constitution of Uganda and lift the restriction on fixed two terms for the presidency so that he could stand again. Ekisanja has now reached global media. Thanks to Geldof asking Museveni to move over.
Not unexpectedly, the Ekisanja supporters have been up in arms decrying his impertinence: how dare he
interferes in our sovereign affairs? What does this foreigner, a musician for that matter, (some say with
angry disbelief), know about Uganda to be asking ‘Mzee’ to step aside?
The uproar culminated in an obviously orchestrated demonstration by supporters of the President on Monday condemning Geldof’s brash pronouncement. While they were at it, they also had non-diplomatic words for the British government for meddling in Uganda’s affairs.
The UK High Commissioner to Uganda has been grumbling rather too loudly recently and also a recent statement by a British Foreign Office junior minister voiced concerns about Uganda’s transition to a genuine multiparty democracy.
According to press reports, there were many placards and slogans on display. They were broadly nationalistic, anti-imperialist, very Pan-Africanist and anti-neo-colonialism. But one in particular caught my attention: it said, “Yes to Aid but No to foreign intervention! While Bob Geldof may not be surprised (and would have been disappointed if people were indifferent to his remarks) at attacks on him, I am not sure how he would react to a planned demonstration today by anti-Museveni, anti-Third term and opposition supporters or activists in his support. They must be hoping they can enlist his support as veteran global publicist for their local cause of preventing Museveni from succeeding himself. To Bob’s crusade to feed starving Africans, the Ugandan opposition is adding delivery of democracy too! The bad news is that only recently, Geldof in yet another choreographed outburst, openly said he was tired of being regarded as “Mr Bloody Africaâ€. However, maybe he can downsize to become Mr Uganda democrat or Terminator of “Sad Termâ€!
The banner that said “Yes to Aid but no to foreign intervention†exposes the self-inflicted humiliating contradiction confronting many African leaders. They expect foreigners to build their roads, feed their people, construct their stadiums, hospitals and other development investments but at the same time want
to assert their independence. Uganda is a country talked up as a success story, one of the periodic
“miracles†of Africa throughout the 1990s though it is fast losing its shine to new “miracles†like
Mozambique. Yet its budget and development plans are more than 50% dependent on foreigners. How sustainable is this in the long-run?
It would be ridiculous for those paying the piper not to want to dictate the tune. After all, those
who attended the Ekisanja demonstration must report back to those who provided them with the logistics,
facilitation and the sodas that followed their successful mission to Parliament Avenue. As it is with individuals, so it is with states and between states where the stakes are much higher.
African governments are prepared to sign away the national economy, without referendum or even perfunctory consultation yet when it comes to some very narrowly defined convenient political issues like
our obligation to continue to choose them, they suddenly declare the people are sovereign. What kind of sovereignty and selective empowerment is this that does not allow you to decide the way your national resources are managed (or mismanaged)? They go to IMF/World Bank without consultation.
They fight wars without consultation but when they have problems with their donor-friends then they remember sovereignty, self-determination and Pan- Africanism. Otherwise they are proud to be seen with their powerful friends from Europe and America. It is like wannabe African-Americans who only remember they are Black when they are in big trouble. Remember OJ Simpson? Now look at Michael Jackson.
Where were those now carrying the banner of non-interference when Uganda and Rwanda tragically fought each other, three times, in the DRC and both Presidents and their Executive entourage travel to Auntie Clare in London to settle their differences!
Like Wole Soyinka challenged Leopold Sedar Senghor of Senegal, the apostle of Negritude, a tiger need not proclaim its tigeritude’.
THE former pop star, of Boomtown Rat’s fame, Bob Geldof (also known as Sir Bob or Saint Bob) is not a very popular man in some very powerful quarters in Uganda these days.
There is nothing new in that because even in the Irish republic where he was born and in Britain where he made his pop name and was later Knighted by the British Queen, not for his pop music but for inspiring the Band Aid appeal that caught global attention in 1984 in response to the Ethiopian famine, he is not universally popular.
He has earned a well-deserved reputation for being a loud-mouth (and here I should declare a potential personal conflict of interest because my mouth does not often have a stopper too), rubbing people the wrong way and ruffling all available feathers in his now famous crusade against hunger, debt and poverty in Africa. I have had occasion to observe that he sometimes appears to be mourning more than the bereaved.
But which champion of lost causes worth that title will not admit to zealotry and singular determination to use every opportunity to make their case?
If there is a Guinness book of records entry for using expletives without caring whether to president or prisoner, diplomat or peasants, that are listening, Bob Geldof should be a runaway winner. It is part of his stock in trade. Sometimes his theatrics actually stand in the way of the message he has which makes many to accuse him of either insatiable individualism or petulant exhibitionism.
I have had one or two run-in with him where it was bull**** for bull****. But his publicity tactics have worked well for him because whatever he says often gets global attention. And so it was typical of him to fly off the handle, go against the grain, throw away the script at the launching of the Blair Commission for Africa two weeks ago and send verbal missiles in an aside about President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and his worst kept secret attempt to tinker with the constitution of Uganda and lift the restriction on fixed two terms for the presidency so that he could stand again. Ekisanja has now reached global media. Thanks to Geldof asking Museveni to move over.
Not unexpectedly, the Ekisanja supporters have been up in arms decrying his impertinence: how dare he
interferes in our sovereign affairs? What does this foreigner, a musician for that matter, (some say with
angry disbelief), know about Uganda to be asking ‘Mzee’ to step aside?
The uproar culminated in an obviously orchestrated demonstration by supporters of the President on Monday condemning Geldof’s brash pronouncement. While they were at it, they also had non-diplomatic words for the British government for meddling in Uganda’s affairs.
The UK High Commissioner to Uganda has been grumbling rather too loudly recently and also a recent statement by a British Foreign Office junior minister voiced concerns about Uganda’s transition to a genuine multiparty democracy.
According to press reports, there were many placards and slogans on display. They were broadly nationalistic, anti-imperialist, very Pan-Africanist and anti-neo-colonialism. But one in particular caught my attention: it said, “Yes to Aid but No to foreign intervention! While Bob Geldof may not be surprised (and would have been disappointed if people were indifferent to his remarks) at attacks on him, I am not sure how he would react to a planned demonstration today by anti-Museveni, anti-Third term and opposition supporters or activists in his support. They must be hoping they can enlist his support as veteran global publicist for their local cause of preventing Museveni from succeeding himself. To Bob’s crusade to feed starving Africans, the Ugandan opposition is adding delivery of democracy too! The bad news is that only recently, Geldof in yet another choreographed outburst, openly said he was tired of being regarded as “Mr Bloody Africaâ€. However, maybe he can downsize to become Mr Uganda democrat or Terminator of “Sad Termâ€!
The banner that said “Yes to Aid but no to foreign intervention†exposes the self-inflicted humiliating contradiction confronting many African leaders. They expect foreigners to build their roads, feed their people, construct their stadiums, hospitals and other development investments but at the same time want
to assert their independence. Uganda is a country talked up as a success story, one of the periodic
“miracles†of Africa throughout the 1990s though it is fast losing its shine to new “miracles†like
Mozambique. Yet its budget and development plans are more than 50% dependent on foreigners. How sustainable is this in the long-run?
It would be ridiculous for those paying the piper not to want to dictate the tune. After all, those
who attended the Ekisanja demonstration must report back to those who provided them with the logistics,
facilitation and the sodas that followed their successful mission to Parliament Avenue. As it is with individuals, so it is with states and between states where the stakes are much higher.
African governments are prepared to sign away the national economy, without referendum or even perfunctory consultation yet when it comes to some very narrowly defined convenient political issues like
our obligation to continue to choose them, they suddenly declare the people are sovereign. What kind of sovereignty and selective empowerment is this that does not allow you to decide the way your national resources are managed (or mismanaged)? They go to IMF/World Bank without consultation.
They fight wars without consultation but when they have problems with their donor-friends then they remember sovereignty, self-determination and Pan- Africanism. Otherwise they are proud to be seen with their powerful friends from Europe and America. It is like wannabe African-Americans who only remember they are Black when they are in big trouble. Remember OJ Simpson? Now look at Michael Jackson.
Where were those now carrying the banner of non-interference when Uganda and Rwanda tragically fought each other, three times, in the DRC and both Presidents and their Executive entourage travel to Auntie Clare in London to settle their differences!
Like Wole Soyinka challenged Leopold Sedar Senghor of Senegal, the apostle of Negritude, a tiger need not proclaim its tigeritude’.