(Vidéo) Hollande fait sa première Francopholie, M. Frindéthié

Francopholie

Dans vos capitales vos peuples vivotent et se meurent

Et vos enfants en guenilles quémandent le long des trottoirs

Vos ponts et vos routes sont des pièges à hommes

Et vos rivières des réservoirs de contaminations

Vos écoles des usines d’imbécillités et de décadence

Qui avilissent bien plus qu’elles n’élèvent :

Et que faites-vous ?

Vous arrivez plutôt ballonnés comme des baudruches

Fagotés dans vos redingotes noires

Tels des choucas autour de la même mangeoire

Vous attendez transpirant et essoufflés

Sous l’impardonnable canicule et les sempiternelles balayures

Vous bousculant autour de quelque grand blanc

Qui vous juge et vous jauge et vous tapote le crâne

Tel le bon maîmaître et ses dogues obéissants

Il vous jette de petites friandises

Que vous vous fauchez pour saisir au vol

Et pour deux sous et un sourire de lui

Vous monnayeriez même votre génitrice

Il paraît que l’on vous a appris à faire beaucoup de choses

Sous la sempiternelle canicule

A japper à frétiller de la queue et à vous rouler par terre

Après avoir appris à rouler vos r

Et quand arrive le grand blanc dans ses colonies

De chaux blanche vous barbouillez fiévreusement vos cases

Votre peuple affamé vous rassemblez le long des routes

A s’égosiller et à battre des mains

Et vos bongos vous sortez

Pour lui offrir un folklore à sa hauteur

Qu’est donc devenue la dignité africaine ?

Votre cupidité a-t-elle des limites ?

L’on me dit que vous avez même appris à téter du postérieur

Allez chanter la francité

Alors que de frayeur vous frémissez à votre national-ITÉ

Allez chanter la Marseillaise

Quand votre hymne vous la connaissez à peine

Comme j’ai honte pour vous

Honte de votre folie circulaire

Honte de votre génuflexion

L’Afrique mérite beaucoup mieux que des choucas de votre espèce

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGKzUwpytws&feature=player_embedded

30 Years from Today, Africa, as a Bloc, Will Become the World Third Economic Power Behind the US and China, Provided… (Part 12), M. Frindéthié

Africa Ought to Enfranchise itself from Greedy Cosigners

The World Bank, the IMF, the Club of Paris and the Club of London are not philanthropic organizations. There are in the business of making money, and especially of producing maximum dividends out of minimum, and preferable no, investment. These financial organizations are the loudspeakers of the core states. It is in the interest of the core states and their multinational corporations that the peripheral states, which in the international division of labor have been slated as raw material providers, remain undeveloped; and the core states do work hard for the role of the peripheral states to remain unchanged. It is a mistake for African leaders to believe that when France or Great Britain, for instance, sponsors African countries for an IDA loan, these countries do it for the simple reason of world courtesy. These sponsorships are nooses around the neck of the African states that the core states tighten or loosen given the direction of the political wind, that is, given their own interests.

The core states are usurers. Their friendship is always interested and conditional, and their loans and aid packages are poisoned gifts that African countries ought to collectively reject.

It is understandable that foreign investors should seek to draw maximum profits from their investments in Africa. On the other hand, it should also be expected that African states would demand the maximum earnings for the exploitation of their resources by foreign multinationals. These two positions are not irreconcilable, and they should constitute the foundations upon which foreign investors and African governments conduct their negotiations. However, when multinational corporations from Western countries operate in Africa, they tend to bully African states to submission through economic blackmailing and threats of military invasions; for indeed,

whenever a powerful state intervenes to invade a weak state, one can be sure that some private investors from the powerful state, unhappy about their returns in the weak state, have directly or indirectly triggered the military intervention. Western multinational corporations have often blindfolded, gagged, and tortured African leaders in the dungeons of Western jouissance. Though, for some inexplicable reasons, most African leaders seem to have enjoyed their servitude, their unexpected proclivities have been depressing for the African masses. For the welfare of the people they are accountable to, African governments ought to get out of their losing rapport with the West.

This can only happen if African nations first place themselves in propitious conditions for rejecting Western countries’ poisoned gifts of aid and loans. African states have to develop their own investment funds and enfranchise themselves from the abusive and exploitative “friendship” that they have maintained with the core states since their very first encounters with the latter. African states should make it their mid-term objective to leave the Bretton Woods institutions, these rapacious organizations that prosper by cultivating misery in Africa. To enfranchise themselves from the usurers that the World Bank and the IMF are, African states, along with other developing countries, should agree to apportion a small part of their annual commodity export revenues to a collective development account from which member states could be loaned money for their development projects. Such an account could also help member states establish strong credit for getting loans, no longer from the core states, which have given enough proof of their insincerity, but this time from such transitional states as China. This idea is not novel. President Gbagbo of Côte d’Ivoire is an indefatigable herald for the creation of what he calls Fonds de Garantie et de Souveraineté, which is essentially the same concept.

The reader will certainly notice that in the solutions that we have just proposed to the development problems of Africa, we have avoided mentioning the dwelt-on question of Africa’s overpopulation, except to recognize that African cities are being overburdened by an exodus from the rural centers. Let it be known that we do not believe that Africa is overpopulated, and therefore we do not believe in the solutions often propounded by Western experts, which demand that African countries reduce their population size. Overpopulation is not what has kept Africa lagging behind. Lack of genuine exchange of technology and of industrialization is. From this perspective, we concur with Chinweizu who writes that [W]hen on the excuse of saving the environment, it is suggested that we perhaps ought not to industrialize, when on the excuse of reducing pressure of population on resources we are urged to control our populations, we ought to be thoroughly skeptical and have not just second, but even tenth thoughts on the advice we are given … the world may be overpopulated as a whole; but is Africa overpopulated with respect to what its resources, if used entirely in Africa, could support at some decent but not wasteful level of consumption? Africa’s poverty ought to end, and it can if the global discrepancy is readjusted in such a way that, instead of giving the West a monopoly on the “ingredients of survival,” those who have actually been at the source of the supremacy of the West are given control over the resources that they produce to that effect. The West should not be afraid of Africa’s success. It is not a matter of taking away from the West what it has. It is just a matter of allowing Africa to use whatever resources nature has granted it to genuinely pull itself out of poverty. A strong Africa is necessarily in the interest of the West, too. Nevertheless, whether the West approves of it or not, a strong Africa is coming of age in the next thirty years.

Related Articles:

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2011/01/16/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-11-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2012/11/19/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-10-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-9-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-8-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-7-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-6-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-5-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-4-m-frindethie/

https://frindethie.wordpress.com/2012/05/29/30-years-from-today-africa-as-a-bloc-will-become-the-world-third-economic-power-behind-the-us-and-china-provided%e2%80%a6-part-2-m-frindethie/

Koné Bruno Nagbagné, l’autre génie du Dozoland: « Qu’est-ce que 10 ou 20 Ivoiriens torturés dans un pays qui en compte 22 millions ? » M. Frindéthié (30/10/2012)

Belles défenses que celles offertes par le ministre des droits de l’homme et des libertés publiques (Gnénema Coulibaly) ainsi que par le porte-parole du gouvernement (Koné Bruno Nabagné) suite au rapport d’Amnesty International accusant le régime de Dramane Ouattara de s’être rendu coupable d’enlèvements, d’incarcérations illégales, de rançonnements de plus de 400 civiles et de brûlures par électrocution et au plastique fondu sur plus de 200 civiles ivoiriens. Alors que nous pensions farfelue la défense de Monsieur Gnénéma, qui sur le plateau de la RTI s’offusquait des chiffres avancés par Amnesty International et leur préférait plutôt « l’insignifiant » chiffre de 10 torturés pour lesquels le régime ne mérite pas que le ciel lui tombe dessus, voici qu’arrive à sa rescousse Koné Nabagné, porte-parole du gouvernement, qui certifie l’aberration.  Se prononçant sur ONUCI-FM, le porte-parole du régime génocidaire réitère l’énormité de son congénère. 10 ou 20 Ivoiriens torturés, cela vaut-il la peine que l’on s’émeuve ? Qu’est-ce que 10 ou 20 torturés dans un pays qui en compte 22 millions ? : « Il y a 22 millions d’habitants dans ce pays et je déplore qu’on s’arrête malencontreusement sur le cas de 10 ou 20 personnes qui perturbent la vie de 22 millions d’Ivoiriens », a-t-il lancé à son interlocuteur. Au vu de la folie circulaire dans laquelle tourbillonne le régime Ouattara, il est tout de même loisible   de se demander à partir de quel chiffre commence l’indécence en Rattrapocratie. C’est à croire que tout le régime génocidaire patauge dans le petit bain de la piscine génétique et morale.

La Côte d’Ivoire des génocidaires à l’heure de l’épuration religieuse (11/11/2011) , Martial Frindéthié

Depuis sa prise de pouvoir par les armes, le régime génocidaire de Dramane Ouattara n’a jamais fait dans la dentelle quant à son intention d’instaurer, en lieu et place de la république laïque qui a toujours existé en Côte d’Ivoire, une république islamique. Déjà dans les années 90, alors que Dramane, croyant pouvoir se présenter aux élections ivoiriennes en faisant du faux et usage de faux, s’était fait pincer et disqualifier pour « nationalité douteuse » comme un vulgaire brouteur par le régime de Bédié, le Boucher d’Abidjan n’avait pas hésité une seconde à faire se fusionner géographie et religion dans sa pleurnicherie légendaire :  « On ne veut pas que je sois président parce que je suis musulman et nordiste ». A partir de cette jérémiade, Dramane Ouattara réussit à fédérer la majorité des musulmans nordistes qui menèrent son jihad contre les communautés en majorité chrétiennes du sud de la Côte d’Ivoire, auxquelles il reprochait, pour la plupart, d’avoir soutenu la candidature du Président Gbagbo.

Ainsi, le 17 avril 2011, ce dimanche des Rameaux, une semaine après l’arrestation du Président Gbagbo, 10 jours après l’assassinat des 8.000 habitants de Duékoué, les Chrétiens de Côte d’Ivoire persécutés jusque dans leurs lieux de culte, se terrèrent chez eux pour éviter les excursions assassines des soldats et milices de Dramane entraînés aux méthodes de Boko Haram, qui, enivrés de l’apothéose « du musulman nordiste », brûlaient églises et paroissiens dans une totale impunité.

On avait cru pourtant que la destruction martiale de la foi chrétienne par l’administration génocidaire allait s’estomper pour prendre une forme plus dissimulée, moins tapageuse ; comme la nomination de Musulmans à la place de Chrétiens dans l’administration publique, comme le remplacement des militaires chrétiens par des milices-dozos, comme la nominations d’incultes seigneurs de guerre de confession musulmane et du nord (tels Ben Laden, Zakaria, Wattao, Massemba, etc.), comme l’armement renforcé des rebelles musulmans du nord et le désarmement des gendarmes et policiers chrétiens, comme l’expulsion des enfants de familles chrétiennes de l’Ecole Militaire Préparatoire Technique (EMPT) de Bingerville et leur remplacement par des enfants de familles musulmanes  du Nord méticuleusement sélectionnées par le très remarquable général Soumaïla Bakayoko ; en fait on avait cru que la destruction brutale et officielle de la foi chrétienne par le régime génocidaire de Dramane Ouattara se ferait avec des gants. C’était sans compter avec la résolution manifeste du régime génocidaire à l’épuration ethnique et religieuse.

Ce mercredi 7 novembre 2012, après avoir tenté en vain de faire endosser aux pasteurs chrétiens les attaques des FRCI-rebelles par le Commando Mystérieux, le régime génocidaire a enfin joué cartes sur table. Le ministre de l’enseignement supérieur de Dramane Ouattara a lancé ses bulldozers à l’assaut de l’Eglise des Assemblées de Dieu de Cocody. Preuve que malgré les appels d’Amnesty International et de la FIDH à la retenue, le régime génocidaire de s’est jamais détourné de ses objectifs dont l’épuration religieuse demeure l’une des pièces maitresses. Aujourd’hui, c’est Kandia Camara, ce sinistre désert culturel qui fait office de « ministre de l’éducation » dans l’administration du boucher venu de Sindou, qui intègre 116 écoles islamistes dans l’éducation publique d’un pays laïc. Bonjour les dégâts!

Africa’s Biggest Challenge Today is to Grow out of its Slave Mentality, M. Frindéthié

Africa’s biggest challenge today is to grow out of its slave mentality, and to grow veritably, in spite of the sabotaging acts of the nostalgic former colonizers assisted by their swarm of self-destructive native informants. This challenge is significant, as it amounts to displacing the frame of reference that informs the judgments of the African elites. Colonization was not just about draining off wealth from Africa; it was also about physically beating the African in the fields and on the worksites, and mentally beating his brain to pulp in the colonial schools and churches in order to outfit him for the maintenance and perpetuation of the ideology of Western dominance. This enterprise of alienation worked so successfully that the first leaders of the newly independent African countries—many of whom are still in power today through their progeny—govern their nations in the interest of the former colonizers. Whenever the Western frame of reference has been challenged by a few farsighted nationalists, whenever these nationalists have rallied enough support to imperil the Western influence on their countries, they have been simply eliminated by native hit men on the payroll of the rapacious Western interests, when their programs have not been sabotaged and their countries literally sacked and set on fire to confirm the propagated notion by a racist and self-centered West of the inability of blacks to govern themselves. Despite the danger of obliteration, a few audacious African intellectuals have not hesitated to challenge the presumed natural center of savage capitalism with its implied hegemonic agenda.

An they are right, for in spite declarations to the contrary, the presumed center is not the necessary center. The presumed center is inherently contradictory insofar as it has failed to uphold the very values upon which rests its assumed centrality. On the matters of freedom, equality, good governance, accountability, and above all, on the matter of democracy, the presumed center has demonstrated its imposture.

            It is understandable that foreign investors should seek to draw maximum profits from their investments in Africa. On the other hand, it should also be expected that African states would demand the maximum earnings for the exploitation of their resources by foreign multinationals. These two positions are not irreconcilable, and they should constitute the foundations upon which foreign investors and African governments conduct their negotiations. However, when multinational corporations from Western countries operate in Africa, they tend to bully African states to submission through economic blackmailing and threats of military invasions; for indeed, whenever a powerful state intervenes to invade a weak state, one can be sure that some private investors from the powerful state, unhappy about their returns in the weak state, have directly or indirectly triggered the military intervention. Western multinational corporations have often blindfolded, gagged, and tortured African leaders in the dungeons of Western jouissance. Though, for some inexplicable reasons, most African leaders seem to have enjoyed their servitude, their unexpected proclivities have been depressing for the African masses. For the welfare of the people they are accountable to, African governments ought to get out of their losing rapport with the West.

This can only happen if African nations first place themselves in propitious conditions for rejecting Western countries’ poisoned gifts of aid and loans. African states have to develop their own investment funds and enfranchise themselves from the abusive and exploitative “friendship” that they have maintained with the core states. African states should make it their mid-term objective to leave the Bretton Woods institutions, these rapacious organizations that prosper by cultivating misery in Africa. To enfranchise themselves from the usurers that the World Bank and the IMF are, African states, along with other developing countries, should agree to apportion a small part of their annual commodity export revenues to a collective development account from which member states could be loaned money for their development projects. Such an account could also help member states establish strong credit for getting loans, no longer from the core states, which have given enough proof of their insincerity, but this time from such transitional states as China. This idea is not novel. President Gbagbo from Côte d’Ivoire is an indefatigable herald for the creation of what he calls Fonds de Garantie et de Souveraineté, which is essentially the same concept.

Cote d’Ivoire: Human Rights Watch Denounces the Partial Justice of the Autocratic Regime

A woman hides her face after recounting how pro-Ouattara forces killed two of her children and her brother.© 2011 Peter Dicampo

A woman hides her face after recounting how pro-Ouattara forces killed two of her children and her brother.
© 2011 Peter Dicampo

(Abidjan)– The Ivorian government has not yet delivered on its promises of impartial accountability for the serious international crimes from the 2010-2011 post-election crisis, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The government should step up support to judges and prosecutors handling these cases so that victims from both sides can finally see justice.

The 73-page report, “Turning Rhetoric Into Reality: Accountability for Serious International Crimes in Côte d’Ivoire,” analyzes Côte d’Ivoire’s uneven efforts to hold to account those responsible for serious international crimes committed following the November 2010 presidential election. Since his May 2011 inauguration, President Alassane Ouattara has repeatedly declared his commitment to bring all of those responsible to account, regardless of political affiliation or military rank. However, while prosecutors have charged more than 150 people with crimes committed during the post-election violence, none of those charged come from the pro-Ouattara forces.

“President Ouattara’s expressed support for impartial justice rings hollow without more concrete action to bring justice for victims of crimes committed by pro-government forces,” said Param-Preet Singh, senior international justice counsel at Human Rights Watch. “If Côte d’Ivoire is going to break from its dangerous legacy in which people close to the government are beyond the reach of the law, it needs credible prosecutions of those responsible for crimes on both sides of the post-election conflict.”

Côte d’Ivoire’s international partners – including the European Union, the United Nations, France, and the United States –should also increase diplomatic pressure and financial support for impartial accountability, Human Rights Watch said.

The report is based on research in Abidjan in September 2012 and follow-up interviews with government officials, lawyers, civil society members, UN representatives, diplomats, and officials from donor agencies.

Internationally recognized results proclaimed Ouattara the winner of the November 2010 election, but Laurent Gbagbo, his opponent, refused to step down as president. That caused a five-month crisis during which at least 3,000 people were killed and 150 women raped, with attacks often carried out along political, ethnic, and religious lines. In November 2011, Gbagbo was transferred to The Hague on a warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC). He remains there in custody pending a determination of whether there is enough evidence to try him for four counts of crimes against humanity.

Cases involving serious international crimes can be sensitive, but the lack of justice can carry high costs. Chronic impunity has fed the repeated episodes of violence in Côte d’Ivoire over the last decade, with civilians paying the greatest price, Human Rights Watch said.

In June 2011, Ouattara created a National Commission of Inquiry, a Special Investigative Cell, and a Dialogue, Truth, and Reconciliation Commission to respond to the abuses committed during the post-election crisis. In August 2012, the National Commission of Inquiry released a summary of its report, which confirmed that serious crimes had been committed by pro-Gbagbo and pro-Ouattara forces, and recommended bringing those responsible for abuses to justice. These findings echoed a UN-mandated international commission of inquiry and reports by human rights groups.

Human Rights Watch called on the Special Investigative Cell, which is tasked with conducting judicial investigations of the post-election crimes, to use the National Commission of Inquiry’s report to conduct a “mapping exercise.” The exercise would essentially be an in-depth overview of the crimes committed by region during the crisis, pinpointing individual suspects where possible. This would help the cell develop a strategy for selecting cases to investigate and prosecute, which it has not yet done.

Non-confidential portions of any “mapping exercise” and prosecutorial strategy should be shared with the public to help build confidence in the investigative unit’s ability to execute its mandate independently and impartially. The Special Investigative Cell likely needs more staff if it is to succeed in bringing impartial prosecutions for serious international crimes, Human Rights Watch said.

Human Rights Watch found that many people accused of post-election crimes have sat in pretrial detention for almost two years, in violation of their internationally recognized fair trial rights, in part as a result of the need to enact long overdue legal reforms. The government should expedite efforts to reform the criminal procedure code so that defendants already in custody can be brought to trial without further delay and are guaranteed a right of appeal. Access to a lawyer should also be made mandatory at an earlier stage, as well as legal assistance for those who cannot afford a lawyer.

ICC states parties, the EU, and the United Nations notably have increasingly signaled their commitment to promote accountability before national courts to make complementarity – the principle under which the ICC only intervenes when national courts are unable or unwilling to do so – a reality. However, the Human Rights Watch report sets out evidence that key partners have only made limited efforts toward those ends in Côte d’Ivoire.

Côte d’Ivoire’s international partners should learn from the mistakes made following the country’s 2002-2003 armed conflict, Human Rights Watch said. After the earlier conflict, the country’s international partners sat by silently while justice was sidelined and impunity took deeper root, helping set the stage for the devastating post-election crisis in 2010 and 2011.

“The lack of key reforms to provide needed support for investigations and prosecutions is holding back progress on accountability for serious international crimes in Côte d’Ivoire,” Singh said. “Côte d’Ivoire’s international partners should work with the government to provide assistance where needed, and use their diplomatic clout to reinforce the message that impunity is not an option.”

The Ivorian government and international donors should also work together to support the independence of judges and prosecutors, and to provide protection and security for witnesses, judges, prosecutors, and defense lawyers involved in cases of serious international crimes. This is of critical importance to ensure fair and impartial justice for the key crimes of the recent past, and to strengthen the Ivorian justice system overall so it can function efficiently and fairly in the future, Human Rights Watch said.

Following requests by both the Gbagbo and Ouattara governments to investigate the violence in Côte d’Ivoire, the ICC opened an investigation in October 2011. The ICC has jurisdiction to try crimes committed in the country after September 19, 2002. The ICC has only publicly issued two arrest warrants, against Gbagbo and his wife, Simone, both charged with crimes against humanity. The Human Rights Watch report concluded, based on interviews with numerous Ivorian civil society activists, that the ICC’s one-sided approach has legitimized the same approach by Ivorian judicial authorities and undermined perceptions of the ICC’s impartiality. Côte d’Ivoire ratified the Rome Statute, the ICC’s founding treaty, in February 2013, becoming the ICC’s 122nd state party.

Simone Gbagbo remains in Ivorian custody facing domestic charges of genocide, among other crimes. The Ivorian government should comply with its obligations either to surrender her to the ICC or, as an alternative, submit a challenge to the admissibility of the case before the ICC because she is being tried for similar crimes domestically.

“The ICC should swiftly investigate crimes committed by those on the Ouattara side and, based on the evidence, seek arrest warrants,” Singh said. “This is essential to restore the ICC’s legitimacy in Côte d’Ivoire and to put pressure on the Ivorian authorities to deliver credible, impartial results.”

Kenya’s Election: What Uhuru Kenyatta’s Victory Means for Africa, Alex Perry

A Masaai woman casts her vote in a general election in Ilbissil, Kenya, March 4, 2013.

A Masaai woman casts her vote in a general election in Ilbissil, Kenya, March 4, 2013.

Uhuru Kenyatta, wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity, won election Saturday as Kenya‘s new President. The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission announced that Kenya’s richest man, the current Deputy Prime Minister and former Finance Minister, and the son of Kenya’s first President Jomo Kenyatta, won 50.07% of the vote — just marginally more than was needed to avoid a second round run-off. Kenyatta’s running mate Will Ruto, a second of the four Kenyans indicted by the ICC, is slated to become Deputy President. Turnout was a high 86%. With the margin of victory so thin, and the count plagued by days of delays and hundreds of thousands of spoiled ballots, Kenyatta’s main rival, Prime Minister Raila Odinga, has already said he will fight it in court.

If the result withstands Odinga’s challenge, a win for Kenyatta would represent the most stunning articulation to date of a renewed mood of self-assertion in Africa. Half a century ago, Africa echoed with the sound of anti-colonial liberation. Today, 10 years of dramatic and sustained economic growth and a growing political maturity coinciding with the economic meltdown in the West and political dysfunction in Washington and Europe, has granted Africa’s leaders the authority and means to once again challenge Western intervention on the continent, whether it comes in the form of foreign diplomatic pressure, foreign aid, foreign rights monitors or even foreign correspondents. In his victory speech, Kenyatta said: “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. That this, indeed, is Kenya’s moment.” He also pledged to work together with his political opponents with “friendship and cooperation.” “Kenya needs us to work together,” he said. “Kenya needs us to move on.” In a pointed warning to the international community, he added: “We expect the international community [to] respect the sovereignty and democratic will of the people of Kenya. The Africa star is shining brightly and the destiny of Africa is now in our hands.”

Supporters of Kenyan presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta touch his picture on an election poster as they celebrate upon learning of his victory in Kenya's national elections on March 9, 2013 in Kiambu, north of Nairobi.

Supporters of Kenyan presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta touch his picture on an election poster as they celebrate upon learning of his victory in Kenya’s national elections on March 9, 2013 in Kiambu, north of Nairobi.

The ICC, based in The Hague, is a particular focus of African anger. The court accuses Kenyatta of being one of four Kenyans who orchestrated the bloody tribal violence which followed the last election in 2007-8. After troops loyal to the incumbent Mwai Kibaki — from Kenyatta’s Kikuyu tribe — stormed the counting center and forced officials to declare their candidate the winner, the country erupted in weeks of killing in which around 1,200 died and tens of thousands were displaced. The ICC intervened to try to bring those most responsible for the violence to account after concluding Kenya was unable to do so for itself

But the ICC’s focus on Africa — nearly all of its investigations concern Africans — has earned it accusations of bias. And the manner in which the 2007-8 tribal violence was beamed around the world by the Western media, deterring tourists and overshadowing the story of an increasingly less impoverished, and more healthy, sophisticated and self-reliant Kenya, also drew widespread resentment. At this election, with a new 2010 constitution, and a new electoral body with a new — though not glitch-free — electronic voting system, Kenyans’ determination to hold a peaceful election has been palpable. The popular mood has also been notably anti-Western. Foreign diplomats have been warned of blood-curdling revenge should they interfere in the poll. Foreign journalists have been publicly ridiculed and denounced as prejudiced if they predicted chaos and disaster. And a central message of most candidates’ campaigns was strident, patriotic self-determination. Kenyatta and Ruto — who deny the charges brought by the ICC — managed to convert a Kenyan public that initially largely supported the ICC’s attempts to call them to account into one that viewed the ICC as a representative of unwarranted Western interference in African affairs. In the last days of the campaign, Kenyatta’s Jubilee Alliance reflected and heightened the anti-West mood, saying it was “deeply concerned about the shadowy, suspicious and rather animated involvement of the British High Commissioner in Kenya’s election.” Such assertions of sovereignty are only likely to intensify under a Kenyatta presidency. Ruto’s trial is due to begin on May 28, Kenyatta’s on July 9. Both men have said they will attend — a point Kenyatta repeated Saturday when he said his government would “continue to cooperate with international institutions.” Kenyatta has, however, said that his official duties would prevent their pair from being at The Hague continually — a pointed diluting of the court’s importance, and one that will likely drag out trials already expected to last several years.

From the West’s perspective, a Kenyatta victory presents a conundrum. Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, Johnnie Carson, warned before the election that “choices have consequences,” widely seen as a recommendation that voters should back Odinga. London has already warned that it would keep official contact with a President Kenyatta to a minimum, as it does with Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe. But the reality is that, in a world where Kenya finds itself as much sought after as suitor, Western powers no longer get to call the shots in Africa. In many ways, and particularly in its home-grown innovations in mobile technology such as mobile banking and solar power, Kenya personifies the new, emerging Africa of young and dynamic entrepreneurs. Its position as East Africa’s business hub has only been enhanced by its recent discovery of large reserves of oil and gas. Kenya is also a lynchpin of the U.S. and European security structure in Africa, ranged as it is against Islamist groups and pirates, particularly in neighboring Somalia. Westerners rely on Kenya in other ways too: the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, is the base of choice for much of the international community in East Africa, from large embassies to aid group headquarters to donor conferences to security contractors. And should the West give Kenya the cold shoulder, it may find it is not missed as it once might have been: Chinese, Indian, Middle Eastern and Latin American diplomats and businessmen are also part of the fabric in today’s Kenya.

In Washington last month, Carson’s predecessor at the State Department Jendayi Frazer warned Western leaders to be “pragmatic” in their approach to Kenya, adding she was “troubled” by Carson’s “very reckless and irresponsible” statement, which she called “essentially meddling in Kenya’s election.” The ICC case against Kenyatta “is a weak one and is based on hearsay,” she said in a public discussion at the Brookings Institution, and — in words that might have come from Kenyatta himself — she added the ICC itself was “a very manipulated institution, particularly by the West.”

Entubés très profond! M. Frindéthié

hausse des prixOr donc tout le vuvuzela du gouvernement génocidaire autour des feux de Noël, de l’arrivée à Abidjan de l’artiste Chris Brown, et de la pyrotechnie meurtrière du nouvel an au plateau n’était que diversion et poudre aux yeux comme la neige à Abidjan ? Pendant que les Ivoiriens avaient les yeux rivés sur le bling bling et la forfanterie organisés par les rattrapocrates, ils se sont fait « entuber profond » par une augmentation perfide du coût des produits de consommation. Comme si les incommodités causées par l’inaptitude des rattrapocrates n’étaient déjà pas assez pesantes sur leur vécu quotidien, avec l’augmentation du prix du butane et du carburant, en 2013, les Ivoiriens devront débourser plus, beaucoup plus, pour cuire leur maigres repas et pour aller à ces emplois qui, depuis l’avènement de la dictature rattrapocrate, se font de plus en plus précaires. L’arnaque continue à Génocidoland.

Carnet de voyage: Maurice, un modèle de développement, M. Frindéthié

Gay Parade à Rose Hill, Maurice

Gay Parade à Rose Hill, Maurice

De septembre 2011 à juillet 2012, j’ai enseigné à l’Université de Maurice dans le cadre du prestigieux programme Fulbright. En attendant la sortie de la monographie que j’ai décidé de consacrer à cette petite île métissée de 2040 km2 nichée dans l’Océan Indien, à quelques 200 kilomètres des côtes sud-ouest de l’Afrique, je ne peux attendre de partager avec vous ce qui donne à Maurice sa réputation paradisiaque. Non, je ne parlerai pas ici des Mauriciennes, certainement les plus belles femmes du monde, qui portent casuellement, sans s’en vanter, sans même le réaliser, comme si cela devait aller de soi, leur beauté explosive, et qui font se pâmer moult visiteurs. Je parlerai plutôt de ce pays qui, sans aucune ressource naturelle (ni diamant, ni or, ni gaz naturel, ni pétrole, ni bois, ni hévéa, ni café, ni cacao, ni coton, ni fruits tropicaux, ni copra, ni anacarde), mais seulement avec quelques hectares de cannes à sucre et de thé, et une singulière dose de détermination, a réussi à se hisser au zénith du développement et à y demeurer pendant plus d’une décennie.

Cette année encore, comme les années précédentes, l’île Maurice a ravi à tous les pays africains la meilleure place en gouvernance. Dans pratiquement tous les domaines de taxinomie établis par l’Ibrahim Index of African Governance pour le classement des pays africains, Maurice reste largement en tête. Sans discours griotiques, sans trompettes, sans darboukas, mais surtout sans rébellions, mais avec une résolution à développer son capital humain, Maurice, ce pays qui, il y a seulement 40 ans était couvert à 70% de champs de cannes, s’est fait une réputation de hub financier et technologique où il fait bon travailler et vivre.

Les économistes—les vrais, plaît-il !—ne tarissent pas d’éloges sur le pays, qu’ils caractérisent de miracle économique. Et en vérité, Maurice—dont le PIB de plus de $8.000 par habitant a constamment augmenté de 5% depuis les 30 dernières années, Maurice qui demeure le premier pays africain en gouvernance, le meilleur environnement africain pour le business, Maurice qui a un taux de chômage en-dessous de 2% , Maurice dont près de 90% des nationaux sont propriétaires des maisons qu’ils habitent, Maurice qui garantit la couverture médicale et sociale gratuite à tous ses citoyens, Maurice qui assure la gratuité de l’éducation du primaire à la fin du cursus universitaire à tous ses enfants, Maurice a des leçons de prospérité à donner, pas seulement au Tiers-Monde, mais aussi au « Premier Monde », y compris les Etats-Unis. Oh, Maurice n’est pas parfait ! La perfection n’est pas de ce monde. Cependant, les dirigeants africains, si prompts à accéder au pouvoir en enjambant des cadavres humains, devraient s’inspirer de ce petit pays qui fait son « petit » bout de chemin en misant sur son capital humain.

 

Enfin de vrais chiffres ! Et les génocidaires demeurent toujours à la traîne, M. Frindéthié

moibrahimÇa y est ! Le classement Mo Ibrahim de 2012 des pays africains est enfin disponible. Et tenez-vous bien, les génocidaires demeurent toujours à la traîne malgré les chiffres fantaisistes que leurs griots avançaient ces dernières semaines. La Côte d’Ivoire des génocidaires demeure 46e sur 52 pays étudiés (46e sur 53 l’année dernière). On aurait pu se dire « ouf, ce n’est pas pire que l’an dernier !» si et seulement si l’on ne faisait pas attention aux détails. Dans les détails, les choses se sont bien dégradées. D’abord, voyons quelques-uns des pays qui ont surclassé la Côte d’Ivoire des génocidaires : Le Sénégal 16e, le Malawi 17; le Mali 20e, le Ruanda 23e, le Kenya 25e, les Comores 31e, Madagascar, eh oui, Madagascar 35e, le Togo 39e. Les génocidaires se consoleront certainement d’être au moins avant des pays comme le Tchad, la Somalie, la Centrafrique, et l’Érythrée. Cependant, comment les génocidaires expliqueront-ils le fait qu’en dépit de ce que clame leur économiste-messie-président sur les ondes propagandistes, l’indice d’opportunités économiques ait chuté de 0,6% depuis 2011, que l’indice de sécurité ait chuté de 8,8% depuis 2011, qu’en matière d’état de droit la Côte d’Ivoire soit 48e sur 52 pays et qu’en matière de développement du capital humain elle se classe 42? Comment expliqueront-ils cela ? Evidemment ils continueront de battre la darbouka des grands discours et de la confusion. Ou peut-être diront-ils que c’est encore le Président Gbagbo qui, depuis la Haye, manipule les chiffres !