My Two Cents on Impact of Kenya’s Elections on Diplomatic Relations

Image

President Uhuru Kenyatta at the inauguration ceremony

The outcome of Kenya’s elections have been described by the western world as “unconventional” since it was expected that Kenyan’s under the new Constitutional dispensation would not have overwhelmingly voted for the two candidates(Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto) who are suspects charged with grievous crimes under the Rome Statute (International Criminal Court). However, if the election results are to go by, it appears that the western world was mistaken and this potends a new paradigm shift of African nations as regards choice of leadership and breaking the norm of being at the beck and call of the western nations.

The election of President Uhuru Kenyatta and his running mate William Ruto, both of whom have pending cases in the ICC, has put western nations like the US and the UK in an awkward diplomatic relationship given that Kenya is a key strategic partner of the US as regards fighting terrorism in the Horn of Africa; it is a major economic hub of the East Africa and Horn of Africa regions and in maintaining regional stability due to its geo-political position. Although before the elections the US had cautioned Kenyans against voting for Uhuru Kenyatta and his co-accused William Ruto to the effect that Johnny Carson noted that “choices have consequences”, it is highly unlikely that the US will completely cut off relations with Kenya or even move to institute sanctions against Kenya.

This can be explained by the change in geo-strategic environment within Africa where China is increasingly creating opportunities for African states to acquire an economic leverage that they did not have before. This change is  causing a diplomatic focus shift among many African countries and the US as well as the other western nations would cautiously be weighing the decision of breaking off ties with Kenya. Jendayi Frazer, a former US Under-Secretary of State for African States confirmed this argument by noting, “The Chinese have changed the playing field and if the US, UK and Europeans don’t want to deal with Uhuru Kenyatta, he has another option (China).”[1]

This assertion demonstrates the diminishing role and diplomatic power of western nations over African states. For a long while now the western nations used their economic power as a diplomatic leverage over African states and often times employing a carrot and stick diplomacy to arm-twist African nations into submission and serve their political and economic interest. However, today the outlook for most African nations is different and majority has embraced the Look-East policy thanks to the entrant of China. This has given opportunities to countries like Kenya to confidently relate with China as a key trading and diplomatic partner without worrying about the consequences of not towing the diplomatic “box” that western nations want to fit the African nations

Another impact of Kenya’s elections to Africa’s international relations is that it sends out a strong message to the human rights regime embodied in the ICC architecture to the extent of a “renewed mood of self assertion in Africa”[2] The ICC regime was established to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. By Kenyan’s choosing to overwhelmingly vote two individuals who have pending cases at the ICC, it’s a strong message to the West that Kenyan’s (Africans) can make their own choices and interpretations of human rights violations irrespective of how skewed  this interpretation of human rights is. This self assertion was best captured by the President-elect in his victory speech when he noted, “Today, we celebrate the triumph of democracy; the triumph of peace; the triumph of nationhood. Despite the misgivings of many in the world, we demonstrated a level of political maturity that surpassed expectations. That is the real victory today. A victory for our nation. A victory that demonstrates to all that Kenya has finally come of age.”

The election of the two ICC indictees is a big denunciation of the ICC process. The process in itself although at first was received with mixed reactions by Kenyans and had received immense support by a majority according to opinion polls; has ended up “being counterproductive and has exacerbated ethnic polarization.”[3] Beyond Kenya, the process has also continued to be perceived as a politicized rather than a judicial and independent process. This has delegitimized its mandate of fighting impunity and has lost support among African nations as it is viewed as western-backed court that only seeks to prosecute Africans. It will be a watershed moment if the ICC succeeded to prosecute the suspects in the Kenya case as  this has a great bearing on the legacy of the court as an international independent judicial court.


[3] Kimenyi, M.S Kenya at a Tipping Point: The 2013 Presidential Election (2012)

My First Ever Media Quote Whoop! Whoop!

http://irinnews.org/Report/97329/Reprieve-for-urban-refugees-in-Kenya-but-fear-persists

“Rights groups say the harassment of refugees – and Somalis in particular – is not limited to security forces, but also exists within wider Kenyan society. Rufus Karanja, a programme officer with the Refugee Consortium of Kenya, said there was growing concern about the safety of refugees in the run-up to the country’s 4 March general election.

“In 2007, many refugees were victims of general xenophobia and insecurity, and many were displaced. We are trying to come up with contingency plans for them ahead of the coming election,” he told IRIN. “Much of the xenophobia is fuelled by the media, who keep linking the attacks to Somali refugees… There is a need for media sensitization on broad aspects of refugee protection.”

A number of civil society groups, under the umbrella of the Urban Refugee Protection Network, on 22 January called on the Kenyan government to end the abuse of refugees that had escalated following the 18 December directive.

“We will continue to pursue, through the courts, reports of extortion, arbitrary arrest and unlawful detention of refugees by security forces,” Karanja said.”

Somalia: Available Options and Interventions

The Failed States Index 2011 ranked Somalia as one of the top three failed states in Africa.[1] The index further indicates that for four years in a row, Somalia held the number one spot in this ranking. This ranking illustrates the magnitude of the complex humanitarian crisis in Somalia which is characterized by two decades of recurrent acute drought, lawlessness, terrorism, political instability and breakdown of the socio-economic structures. For many people whenever the word Somalia is mentioned, the million dollar questions that seem to linger include: Is Peace possible? Are there available options to restore the country into sustainable peace and to stabilize the dire humanitarian situation?

Over the years, the international community has attempted to carry out various interventions in an effort to address the conflict and humanitarian situation in Somalia. However majority of these interventions have not borne much fruit in terms of stabilizing and restoring peace in Somalia since most of them have majorly been humanitarian and militaristic.  Take for instance the 1992 UN intervention in Somalia where the UN Security Council Resolution 794 approved the formation of a United Task Force (UNITAF) whose mandate was to use “all necessary means” to guarantee the delivery of humanitarian aid and to stabilize the situation in Somalia.   This intervention led to the break out of gun battles between the local militia and the peace keepers. The subsequent military operations which were led by the US resulted in heavy casualties which led to the withdrawal of the UN soldiers from Mogadishu.

The international community also attempted at stabilizing Somalia by backing the establishment of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG). This came about after a series of international peace conferences and diplomatic negotiations between the different major factions in Somalia. The TFG comprises of an executive branch and a legislative branch and has since then become the internationally recognized government of Somalia.[2] However this intervention is perceived to have failed because the TFG has not received popular support from the Somalis as it is viewed as a western-backed government and its era has been marred by political bickering by the different factions within the members of Parliament. This political bickering has hampered its objective of creating political stability and charting the way forward for drafting of the country’s Constitution as envisioned in the Transitional Federal Charter. Kenya as a key player in the region also decided to intervene in Somalia under the Operation Linda Nchi in a bid to eliminate the threat of al-Shabaab following the multiple kidnappings and attacks they had carried out in Kenya. In the recently concluded London Conference on Somalia, the international community agreed to inject new momentum into the political process in Somalia, to strengthen AMISOM by calling on troop contributing countries to add more troops and to help Somalia develop its own security forces. A careful analysis of most of these interventions by the international community, reveal that they are short-term interventions which do not address the root cause of the problems in Somalia.

As the debate on Somalia rages on there is great need for the international community to realize that achieving sustainable peace in Somalia and durable solutions for the Somali refugees can only be achieved through a long-term multi-pronged approach that addresses the questions of: What is the role of the international community in developing sustainable interventions in the Somali conflict? How best can durable solutions be achieved through militaristic interventions? How viable is the idea of returning Somali refugees without first stabilizing the socio-political environment in Somalia? The ideal pragmatic approach of restoring peace to Somalia and fighting al-Shabaab should be one that adopts a combination of humanitarian, diplomatic, and militaristic approaches. The use of all these approaches should have the sole objective of addressing the root causes of the problems in Somalia that have resulted in the protracted conflict and displacement of scores of Somalis into neighboring countries.

After the Kampala bombing in 2010, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni was on record calling on African leaders to team together and “kick al Shabaab out of Africa.” I reckon that it is such radical views and war mongering that has continued to radicalize al Shabaab. Such views only aim at treating the symptoms of the crisis in Somalia but they do not effectively tackle the real problems. Such a call only amounts to entrenching al-Shabaab’s terrorizing activities and offers them a good public relations platform for their actions and message. When leaders like President Museveni choose to breathe out the “crazy war vibe”, which is the model that Kenya has gladly adopted through issuing of threats by our Minister of Internal Security and Minister of Defense; al Shabaab gets free media platform to send out the message that “we are here and are stronger.”

To effectively tackle the threat of insecurity caused by al-Shabaab, there is need for a rethinking on how to address the problem of terrorism. This is because al-Shabaab is not only a threat to Somalia or Kenya alone, but to the whole of the Horn of Africa region. Therefore efforts to tackle the threat of al-Shabaab should not be entirely based on militarized solutions such as the Operation Linda Nchi or AMISOM, but should also incorporate non-militarized solutions that aim at rebuilding the socio-economic structures in Somalia. For a country whose economic infrastructure has been severely damaged by years of civil conflict, terrorist attacks and recurrent drought, the international community ought to be busy strategizing on how to capacitate the next Somali government on how to rebuild and restore the country’s socio-economic structure. The Turkish government has already engaged in this venture by being the first country in 20 years to open an embassy in Mogadishu and has commenced various development-oriented projects. The Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayip in his visit to Mogadishu last year announced Turkey’s commitment to invest and rebuild the infrastructure of Somalia.[3] Turkey has already started rebuilding the social fabric in Somalia by reconstructing roads, the international airport and hospitals for Somalis. It is such efforts and interventions that should be lauded by the international community and that should provide the impetus for galvanizing financial resources and support for Somalia.

The interventions by Turkey embody a durable solution that addresses the situation in Somalia as they seek to rebuild as well as restore livelihoods for the people of Somalia. The protracted situation of poverty, high rates of unemployment and lack of access to alternative education has contributed to a situation of vulnerability for many young people in Somalia who according to various reports are being recruited at an alarming rate by the al-Shabaab. Therefore, efforts to curb this should be directed at how to reach out to these young Somalis who have become hopeless in and outside of a failed state where getting recruited into al Shabaab has become the alternate lucrative option as opposed to enrolling in school or engaging in meaningful employment.

A practical way of targeting the youth in Somalia is to develop strategies on how to first disarm the majority of armed youths, through peace building and disarmament programmes. Secondly is to target emancipating the minds and hearts of the young people from the al-Shabaab indoctrination which is another leading factor of conscription into the group. These interventions should result in deconstructing the propaganda and brain-washing that al-Shabaab has been advancing to young Somalis. The challenge that the international community has is to develop strategies of how young people and Somalis in general can get access to alternative media sources and constructive information to emancipate their minds and hearts.

As the mandate of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) comes to an end this year, there is need for the international community to take stock of what has been achieved in the 7 years that the TFG has been in place. This exercise would be of great help to look at the lessons learnt and chart a way forward for a comprehensive political solution. One of the lessons that the international community should have learnt by now is that imposing a government upon a people does not solve the political crisis but only serves to further destabilize the political situation as has been the case for Somalia.

As a way forward, the international community should advocate and support the establishment of an inclusive and participatory process that charts the roadmap for a political solution that will guarantee sustainable peace in the country. The IGAD Assembly of Heads of State and Government has recently endorsed a Grand Stabilization Strategy for South and Central Somalia during their 20th Extra Ordinary Session. This strategy aims at an inclusive process to determine political and administrative arrangements in the liberated areas at district and regional levels, while building on existing structures.[4]  Therefore as Somalia goes through the next phase post-the TFG mandate which ends in August 2012, international actors ought to support this Grand Strategy and develop implementation mechanisms which will result in the restoration of democracy and rule of law in Somalia.

One way of implementing this strategy and making the process inclusive and participatory for all key actors, is to involve various Somali clan leaders in the negotiation process for a Somalia National Government. It is only by creating an inclusive and participatory process of negotiation and consensus building that a legitimate governing system will be established which is accepted by majority of the Somalis. Such a process will create the basis upon which a national governing body would be elected through a democratic process. Further, an arrangement such as this, will provide the people of Somalia with an alternative leadership option as opposed to being subjected to the illegitimate rule by al-Shabaab.

In conclusion, it should be appreciated that the protracted conflict situation in Somalia needs a multifaceted approach of incorporating militarized and non-militarized options as a strategy towards attaining sustainable peace for Somalia. The positive role that the international community can play is to facilitate the socio-economic progress and development of Somalia. Further the international community should realize that their strong point in achieving sustainable peace in Somalia lies in their unity and having a coordinated support for Somalia.


[4] IGAD News Issue 44 February – March 2012

The Real Reason for the Offensive on al Shabab (By Okech Okech)

By Okech Okech

Celebrated American financier and banker JP Morgan said that a man always has two reasons for doing anything: the good and the real reason. Over acentury ago when this incisive observation was made, the subject wasn’t Kenya’s military nor al Shabab, in fact both had not been born. Today, these words sound truer and more relevant if one is trying to objectively look at the Kenya vs. al Shabab war.

To begin with, Al Shabab is a ruthless militant group that has made public their affiliation to al Qaeda. They have tormented native Somalis and have made it impossible to have an operational government in Somalia, external efforts to have a transitional federal government notwithstanding. Kenya has continually borne the brunt of their activities in Southern Somalia; influx of refugees, violence spill over into Kenyan territory and kidnappings within the Kenyan territory that are not only a security problem but also economic threat.

Al Shabab is quite naughty, they have hijacked several cargo ships and notably MV Faina that had in it heavy military artillery and other forms of arsenal reportedly destined for South Sudan. The public opinion had favoured a more hawkish response to these threats and this was only given a nod after two or three Europeans had been kidnapped by the same Al Shabab militia.

Which begs the question what are the real reasons for the military offensive against al Shabab? While the good reason is to protect Kenyan economic interests, security and territorial integrity and perhaps sovereignty of the country, the real reason as any keen observer would expect remains obscure.

In industrialized states like US, the real reason for going to war is to create jobs, increase local industrial production and improve the balance of payment or gain control over natural resources such as oil and natural gas. This is a complex of interrelationships often referred to as the military-industrial complex, a term coined by Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell address.

So where does Kenya stand? In the war against al Shabab, the defence forces are in it not for the Kenyan interests but it is squarely about pride. This is why. Al Shabab is not new and they have consistently posed a threat to our national interests ever since it was born. It is a little disturbing when one tries to look at what might have moved our forces to launch the offensive now and not earlier. Al Shabab is a terrorist network that operates in more than one country and because of its operational links to well funded terror groups like Al Qaeda, the Kenyan military intelligence must have advised that by occupying southern Somalia, al Shabab will not be defeated. This might have been the reason why the CIC had been reluctant to allow our forces to cross into Somalia to weed out Al Shabab and instead opted to create military bases close to the border with Somalia. May be he was drawing lessons from US experience in Afghanistan where despite the superiority of the US military intelligence and military technology, finishing Taliban and Al Qaeda has taken over a decade and still counting…

Kenya also understands the devastating effects the war has on the economy and the treasury must have advised that the shilling would continue to lose against major world currencies. With the cost of living factored in, I don’t see how Finance minister would have okayed the move since we have to import everything including bullets and it is tactically naïve to rely on US and France on the war front.

A week into the war and several questions are being asked as to why did the CIC sanction the war, even without a parliamentary vote on the same. The public opinion is fast changing after two blasts in Nairobi downtown in 24hrs that have rekindled the horrendous scenes of August 7th.

The fact that it was the ministers of defence and security who made the chilling announcement should not be taken lightly. It was the CIC who was supposed to make the announcement to Kenyans and the world, flanked with the PM, VP, house speaker and ministers for defence, security, finance and Foreign Affairs, together with CGS, military commanders and police commissioner. The message it sent was that the war is after all not about Kenya and Kenyans, nor is it about our tourism and the economy, not even our security.

This war is about an individuals’ pride and whose pride is it? The war is about CGS Gen Julius Karangi, it’s about his personality and his legacy. I can bet that if Gen. Kianga was still at the helm, perhaps we would have increased surveillance along the border with Somalia and try to weed out resident sympathizers of Al Shabab. Who knows, our own Guantanamo prison could have been established instead of going into a rash, costly and seemingly unwinnable war that exposes us to greater risk. I call it rash because Kenya did not seek cooperation with her neighbours and lately the TFG president has been quoted as saying he does not support the presence of Kenyan military is Somalia. Kenya should have had an effective and coordinated intelligence not an ethnically oriented operation, and a sabotage of the economic networks that make Al Shabab have a strong internal presence, both in Kenya and Somalia.

Who knows, with a general election in the offing, could it be a plot to extend the life of the current administration or an armchair warrior is making money through the imports? Or is it a mere, albeit expensive, tact meant to distract us from grand larceny in government and an economy on a nosedive, rising cost of living with no increase in disposable income and an ever depreciating currency? Remember this administration scores poorly on the economy.

Okech Okech is Masters student at the University of Nairobi (Political Science Department) and a commentator on issues of governance, leadership and forward social, political and economic trajectory in Kenya. You can view his blog at http://okech.wordpress.com/

Brief on the East African Community (Part One)

1.0 Introduction

The Treaty for the establishment of the East African Community was signed by the three Heads of State in Arusha on 30th November, 1999 and entered into force on 7th July, 2000.

The East African countries, Burundi, Rwanda, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda cover an area of over 1.82 million square kilometers, a population of about 126.6 million who share a common history, language, culture and infrastructure and a combined GDP of 73 billion US dollars. These advantages provide the Partner States with a unique framework for regional co-operation and integration.

Prior to re-launching the East African Community in 1999, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda had enjoyed a long history of co-operation under successive regional integration arrangements. These included the Customs Union between Kenya and Uganda in 1917, which the then Tanganyika later joined in 1927; the East African High Commission (1948-1961); the East African Common Services Organization (1961-1967); and the defunct East African Community (1967-1977). The revival of EAC witnessed an expansion with the joining of Rwanda and Burundi in June, 2007.

2.0 The Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community

Signed in November, 1999 the Treaty for the establishment of the EAC is informed by the EAC Development Strategy of 1997-2000, which tried to avoid the shortcomings associated with the earlier integration initiative. It also took into account the ongoing globalization process, as exemplified by the intensification of competition brought about by the liberalization of international trade and financial market systems. It is in this context therefore that the Treaty emphasizes that:

i. The objective of the Community shall be to develop policies and programmes aimed at widening and deepening co-operation among the Partner States in political, economic, social and cultural fields, research and technology, defence, security and legal and judicial affairs, for their mutual benefit;

ii. To achieve these objectives, one of the important guiding principles of the Community shall be people centered and market driven co-operation;

iii. The priority of the Community shall be economic co-operation, which is expected to form the basis for political co-operation in the long term;

iv. The integration process shall be carried out in a participatory manner, involving broad participation of key stakeholders including women, youth, private sector and the civil society;

v. The Vision of regional integration in East Africa is to create wealth, raise the living standards of all people of East Africa and enhance the international competitiveness of the region through increased production, trade and investments;

vi. The East African regional integration process shall be a progressive process, commencing with a Customs Union as the entry point to the Community followed by a Common Market, then a Monetary Union and ultimately a Political Federation; and

vii. Movement from one level of economic integration to another shall be through negotiated protocols, starting with that on the establishment of an EAC Customs Union.

3.0 Organs & Institutions of the EAC

The main Organs of the EAC are the Summit of Heads of State and Government; Council of Ministers; Co-ordination Committee; Sectoral Committees; East African Court of Justice (EACJ), East African Legislative Assembly (EALA); the Secretariat and EAC Institutions that include the following:

– The Lake Victoria Basin Commission
– Civil Aviation Safety and Security Oversight Agency (CASSOA)
– Lake Victoria Fisheries Organization
– Inter-University Council for East Africa
– East African Development Bank

Read more : http://www.eac.int/

Electoral Positions in 2012 Elections

Executive
1. President + Running Mate (Deputy President)

Parliament
2. Senate (Art. 98)
– Senators (Elected from the 47 Counties) Art. 98(1)(a)
– 2 youth representative (one man and one woman)
– 2 persons with disabilities (one man and one woman)

3 and 4. National Assembly (Art 97)
– 290 Members of NA(Elected from geographic constituencies) (Art. 97(1)(a))
– 47 Women (Elected from the Counties)(Art. 97(1)(b))
– 12 members nominated by Parliamentary political parties

5 and 6. County Level
– Governor (Elected 47 Counties)(Art.180)
– County Assembly
o Members of CA Elected in the Geographical wards; (Art. 193)
o Special interests groups

Note: There will be 6 positions to vote for from the Executive to the County level.
Art means Articles in the Constitution of Kenya

How Revolutions Happen (By Dr. Mark Almond )

Revolutions can be short and bloody, or slow and peaceful. Each is different, though there are recurring patterns – including some that were on show in Egypt.

Trotsky once remarked that if poverty was the cause of revolutions, there would be revolutions all the time because most people in the world were poor. What is needed to turn a million people’s grumbling discontent into a crowd on the streets is a spark to electrify them.

Violent death has been the most common catalyst for radicalising discontent in the revolutions of the last 30 years. Sometimes the spark is grisly, like the mass incineration of hundreds in an Iranian cinema in 1978 blamed on the Shah’s secret police.

Sometimes the desperate act of a single suicidally inflammatory protester like vegetable salesman Mohammed Bouazizi in Tunisia, in December 2010, catches the imagination of a country.

Even rumours of brutality, such as the claims the Communist secret police had beaten two students to death in Prague in November, 1989, can fire up a public already deeply disillusioned with the system. Reports that Milosevic had had his predecessor, Ivan Stambolic, “disappeared” in the weeks before the Yugoslav presidential elections in 2000 helped to crystallise Serbian rejection of his regime.

Revolutions: Iran to Egypt

* Iran: Jan 1978 – Apr 1979
Days: 448, Deaths: 3000+; Goal: To overthrow the Shah. Democrats started the popular uprising, but Islamists took over.
Goal achieved
* Tiananmen Square: Apr – Jun 1989
Days: 51; Deaths: est. 3,000; Goal: To establish democracy, abolish one-party rule and put an end to corruption.
Goal not achieved.
* East Germany: Sept – Nov 1989

* Russia: 19-21 Aug 1991
* Indonesia: 12-21 May 1998
* Serbia: Sep – Oct 2000
* Georgia: 2-23 Nov 2003
* Ukraine: Nov – Dec 2004
* Lebanon: Feb – Apr 2005
* Iran: Jun – Aug 2009
* Tunisia: 17 Dec 2010 – 14 Jan 2011
Days: 30; Deaths: 147; Goal: To overthrow the corrupt and unpopular regime of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali.
Goal achieved.
* Egypt: 25 Jan – 11 Feb 2011
Days: 18; Deaths: est. 300; Goal: To overthrow President Hosni Mubarak and bring about free democratic elections.
Goal partially achieved.

External pressure plays a role in completing regime-change. In 1989, the refusal of the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, to use the Red Army to back East European Communists facing protests in the streets made the local generals realise that force was not an option.

The revolution that toppled Mubarak

The United States has repeatedly pressed its authoritarian allies to compromise and then, once they have started on that slippery slope, to resign.

What collapses a regime is when insiders turn against it. So long as police, army and senior officials think they have more to lose by revolution than by defending a regime, then even mass protests can be defied and crushed. Remember Tiananmen Square.

But if insiders and the men with guns begin to question the wisdom of backing a regime – or can be bought off – then it implodes quickly.

Tunisia’s Ben Ali decided to flee when his generals told him they would not shoot into the crowds. In Romania, in December, 1989, Ceausescu lived to see the general he relied on to crush the protesters become his chief judge at his trial on Christmas Day.

The Gathering that toppled Mubarak

Africa Uprising

Something exciting is happening on the motherland Africa. Uprisings after uprisings. From the streets of Tunis, Algiers and now to the streets of Cairo.

People are tired of the old dictatorial regimes…When I see young and old alike taking to the streets..shouting Down with Ben Ali!! Down with Mubarak!! I get the feeling that it’s not that the people are angry with this incumbent leaders on an individual basis…rather they are angry of the despondent regimes…

Regimes that have capitalized on stealing from the public coffers, regimes that have only sought to enrich themselves at the expense of the poor citizens, regimes that only look out for the interests of their kind, forgetting that they took an oath to serve the people, to govern justly and in honor!

Take the case of the uprising in Tunisia which was triggered by a university graduate who decided to burn himself after being frustrated with the high cost of living, high rates of unemployment and lack of sense of dignity in a his own country.

Citizens of these nations are fed up at their systems of government, systems that oppress them instead of providing a form of livelihood, systems that make them feel like prisoners in their own independent nation.

This is the way to go Africa!! I am excited at how people are rising to the ocassion to demand their inherent rights. To demand that they be treated with dignity. That people are standing up to despondent regimes is a good thing for Africa. I am excited that there is a new sense of ownership in how our leaders rule. More so that people are using social websites such as twitter and facebook to create a revolution.

Yes this is it Africa. Lets rise up and demand that our forefathers who fought and paid with their lives for our independence did not die in vain. Let’s demand for proper leadership and social justice.

This is a luta continua. Nkozi Afrika!!

A.U Anthem

Let us all unite and celebrate together
The victories won for our liberation
Let us dedicate ourselves to rise together
To defend our liberty and unity

O Sons and Daughters of Africa
Flesh of the Sun and Flesh of the Sky
Let us make Africa the Tree of Life

Let us all unite and sing together
To uphold the bonds that frame our destiny
Let us dedicate ourselves to fight together
For lasting peace and justice on earth

O Sons and Daughters of Africa
Flesh of the Sun and Flesh of the Sky
Let us make Africa the Tree of Life

Let us all unite and toil together
To give the best we have to Africa
The cradle of mankind and fount of culture
Our pride and hope at break of dawn.

O Sons and Daughters of Africa
Flesh of the Sun and Flesh of the Sky
Let us make Africa the Tree of Life

SOURCE: http://www.au.int/en/about/symbols

Previous Older Entries

Categories

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,286 other followers

Flickr Photos