AfricaFocus Bulletin
March 28, 2017 (170328)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

“The roots of the New Liberty Gold project stretch back before 1995,
when a resource extraction license was issued by former warlord
turned president Charles Taylor to a mysterious company called
KAFCO. The permit changed hands a few times and, today, Avesoro holds its
permit via a wholly-owned subsidiary, Bea Mountain Mining Corp – a
company created in 1996 by Keikurah B. Kpoto, one of Taylor’s
closest associates.  In 1998, foreign interests bought Bea Mountain
Mining. The beneficiaries of the sale were well hidden. According to
a document IRIN procured, three quarters of its capital belonged to
a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. The rest was
held by owners of bearer shares.” – IRIN investigative report, March
21, 2017

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/lib1703.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/lib1703.php

This investigative report on the largest gold mine in Liberia begins
with the mining company’s failure to reimburse displaced Liberians,
and the World Bank’s failure to hold them to account. But the lack
of accountability extends to basic questions about the ownership of
the company and the use of tax havens. As such, it is one striking
illustration of what seem to be pervasive characteristics of
projects financed by the IFC, the World Bank’s arm for working with
private sector companies.

This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains two short articles by journalists
who have been investigating the project, and a short press release
from Oxfam on a study of IFC projects last year.

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on Liberia, visit
http://www.africafocus.org/country/liberia.php

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on economic development issues,
visit http://www.africafocus.org/econexp.php

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

A Tip for AfricaFocus Bulletin

If you appreciate AfricaFocus Bulletin, you can help support this
work by leaving a small tip. For example, 10 cents per issue for the
last 50 issues would be $5. Every contribution helps no matter how
small. You can give a tip on your computer or smartphone at these
two secure sites:

https://cash.me/$africafocus – to pay with debit card from a U.S.-
based bank.

https://paypal.me/AfricaFocusBulletin – to pay with PayPal
account

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

How a gold mine has brought only misery in Liberia

Emmanuel Freudenthal and Alloycious David

Kinjor, Liberia, 21 March 2017

http://tinyurl.com/mzgdjcb

(This investigative report is being jointly published by
100Reporters, IRIN and Le Monde Afrique. 100Reporters is an award-
winning investigative news organisation based in Washington, DC. Its
objective is to reveal untold stories on corruption, transparency
and accountability. IRIN delivers unique, authoritative and
independent reporting from the front lines of crises to inspire and
produce a more effective humanitarian response. Le Monde Afrique is
a pan-African francophone media for news, reporting, analysis and
debates.)

[Article in French available at http://tinyurl.com/m72pjnd]

The maths was merciless. Siah (name changed) had the equivalent of
$5 in her pocket but needed $15 to treat her youngest son Joseph’s
malaria. She had travelled an hour to the nearest clinic only to
discover she couldn’t afford the medicine. Joseph died that day, as
she cradled him in her arms.

Siah lives in Kinjor, a small town in the lush forests of western
Liberia. Just a few steps from her home, Liberia’s largest
commercial gold mine, New Liberty Gold, plans to dig out a billion
dollars-worth of the precious metal.

The Liberian government and its multilateral funding partners see
commercial mining as a path to development in a country still
recovering from the impact of 11 years of civil war.

Under the law, communities are obliged to give up their land rights
and move, in return for compensation. But IRIN’s months-long
investigation can reveal that financial reward isn’t always
forthcoming from the foreign mining operations.

To make way for New Liberty Gold, 325 families in two villages,
Kinjor and Larjor, had to abandon their homes, farms, and artisanal
mines that had provided some income. In return for their move to a
new village, also named Kinjor, and carved out of the forest near
the mine, the company promised to make life better: new houses, a
school, hand pumps – and what could have made all the difference to
Joseph – a clinic.

Construction began on the mine in 2014, and the first gold sales
came a year later. Even though the company describes the operation
as a “key asset”, the promised better amenities are yet to
materialise years later, and there has already been one major
chemical spill that has polluted the environment.

New Liberty Gold has the backing of the World Bank’s International
Finance Corporation, which since 2014 invested $19 million and
became a key shareholder. That support was predicated on a 155-page
Resettlement Action Plan by the company, which listed its planned
$3.9 million investments in the new Kinjor.

During the IFC board meeting that approved the mining project, the
US delegate formally raised “serious concerns” regarding “the
environmental and social risks posed”. The US urged the IFC “to work
with the company to ensure that all appropriate funds are set aside
for this [resettlement] plan”.

A history of displacement

Projects funded by the World Bank have displaced more than three
million people between 2004 and 2013 in 124 countries, according to
data published by the International Consortium of Investigative
Journalists (https://www.icij.org/project/world-bank).  Those
shortcomings were acknowledged by Bank president Jim Yong Kim in
2015, after an internal review found “major problems” that caused
him “deep concern”.

But the Bank and the IFC do not appear to have held New Liberty Gold
accountable for failing to meet its basic obligations, despite a
commitment made by the IFC on its website to help the company
“implement best practice standards” in Kinjor.

“I’m really disappointed to say that [this case] is one amongst
many,” said Jessica Evans, a senior researcher at Human Rights
Watch. “We’ve seen time after time serious failings by the World
Bank and the IFC when it comes to resettlement.”

That is little comfort for Siah. Outside a neighbour’s house in
Kinjor, she fought back the tears to speak about her son’s death.
Her voice rose in anger when she listed the failings of New Liberty
Gold: “no hospital here, no safe drinking water”.

“There are toilets right next to the water pump. It makes us sick,”
she added. “We are suffering.”

The owner of the mine, Avesoro Resources Inc. (previously called
Aureus Mining), has built a school and installed some water pumps.
But the rest of the action plan, the compensation due for uprooting
people against their will, remains little more than a wish list.

Still waiting

Controversy at mining projects like New Liberty Gold is not new in
Liberia. For nearly 100 years, natural resource extraction – from
rubber to minerals – has been steeped in violence and corruption.
Opaque investments carry a tremendous risk in the context of such a
fragile state as Liberia.

In one of Kinjor’s narrow alleys flanked by mud huts, Yarpawolo
Gblan, an old man in a faded black polo shirt, stepped forward: “Are
you a journalist? Come and see my house!”

We sat on a bench, our backs to the wooden wall of a hut scrawled
with the phone numbers of Gblan’s children. Three years ago, Avesoro
had forced him to move from what had been his home for a decade,
into “temporary” accommodation, to make way for the mining project.

The huts the company provided have just two small rooms: not nearly
big enough to house Gblan’s family of eight. He extended the
original structure as best he could, using his own resources.

The huts were meant to be a stopgap measure, until the displaced
families could move into 325 “improved houses” promised by the
company. The unfinished shells of those houses stand in ordered
rows, just a few hundred metres away.

But construction stopped longer than a year ago. Weeds now grow
between the brick walls, and slimy bright-green algae thrive in
puddles fed by rain falling through where roofs should be.

The company man

Half a day’s drive from Kinjor, in a wealthy suburb of Liberia’s
capital, Monrovia, a striking white-walled villa serves as the
headquarters of New Liberty Gold.

Debar Allen is the company’s general manager, a physically imposing
man who fills his generously appointed office. From behind a large
wooden desk, he explained in a calm baritone that people like Gblan,
who were supposed to have been resettled, “do not want to move from
where they are”.

He offered two reasons for the construction delay: the need “to get
going with the mining project because we were running out of funds”,
and the desire of those being resettled to build their own permanent
houses where they are now. “Rather than bringing contractors from
Monrovia, we have to team up with them,” he said.

The World Bank, via email, offered a different explanation. With
“the Ebola outbreak, the company faced significant construction
delays. As a consequence, the project experienced some significant
challenges that impacted its financial/cash flow position.”

The result was that “the full implementation of several aspects of
the project had to be postponed, and some of the permanent houses
have not yet been completed.”

But in February 2015, the IFC provided a $5.3 million cash injection
for New Liberty Gold to help the company “cope with additional
costs” as a result of the Ebola outbreak, and to “support the
company’s ongoing work in Liberia”.

In reality, the company should have finished the resettlement houses
several months before Ebola hit Liberia. Moreover, the outbreak was
brought under control more than 18 months ago, yet the new housing
construction will not be completed any time soon.

Allen explained: “We signed with the [local] leaders a memorandum of
understanding that postpones the completion to the end of next
year”. That means December 2017.

Community representatives told IRIN that the company had asked them
to sign numerous times, accepting the new deadline, and that they
eventually gave in. They had reasoned that whether they signed or
not, the houses would not be built any faster.

The World Bank did not reply to IRIN’s requests for more details on
the resettlement timeline and the mine’s failure to make good on its
promises to the community.

Dead fish and rashes

In March 2016, an accident at New Liberty Gold mine released cyanide
and arsenic, byproducts of the mining process, into a nearby river
that serves villages downstream. In Jikando, where people use its
water to fish, bath and wash clothes, they began to see dead fish
floating. Soon, they started developing skin rashes themselves.

A slim teenager lifted his t-shirt to show a rash he has had since
shortly after the spill. He told IRIN it still itched but said: “it
doesn’t worry me all the time”. Several mothers confirmed their
children were still afflicted by similar rashes. No medical tests
have been conducted on villagers who’ve reported similar effects.

Avesoro’s Allen said the company found out about the leak in April,
after a phone call from the local chief in Jikando. He noted that
the company now regularly delivers frozen fish to replace the
poisoned ones, as the community’s “source of protein was from the
creek”.

On 14 April, shortly after the leak, the Liberian Environmental
Protection Agency fined the company. On 10 May, Avesoro publicly
disclosed the spill to shareholders, stating that its
“investigations to date indicate no adverse impact on any human
settlement”.

It’s difficult to pin responsibility for the mine’s failures on any
individual because it’s hard to identify the successive true owners
of New Liberty Gold. Aureus is part of a long list of shell
companies named in the Panama Papers leak, many of them registered
in opaque jurisdictions.

The latest twist in the ownership trail came at the end of 2016 when
MNG Gold, headquartered in Turkey, took over Aureus and changed its
name to Avesoro Resources Inc.

The warlord

Investing in companies with complex ownership is not unusual for the
IFC. A recent report by Oxfam found that 84 percent of the IFC’s
investments in sub-Saharan Africa in 2015 used “secrecy”
jurisdictions.

But the roots of the New Liberty Gold project stretch back before
1995, when a resource extraction license was issued by former
warlord turned president Charles Taylor to a mysterious company
called KAFCO.

The permit changed hands a few times and, today, Avesoro holds its
permit via a wholly-owned subsidiary, Bea Mountain Mining Corp – a
company created in 1996 by Keikurah B. Kpoto, one of Taylor’s
closest associates.

The exploitation of Liberia’s gold and diamonds allowed Taylor,
convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the
International Criminal Court in 2012 and now serving a 50-year
prison sentence in the UK, to fund his war effort.

In 1998, foreign interests bought Bea Mountain Mining. The
beneficiaries of the sale were well hidden. According to a document
IRIN procured, three quarters of its capital belonged to a company
incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. The rest was held by
owners of bearer shares.

Bearer shares are the vehicles of choice for the corrupt because
they are owned by whoever holds the paper certificates, just like
cash. There is no trace of their owner in company records and they
can easily become covert payments for pretty much anything.

The World Bank nevertheless wrote that it had undertaken due
diligence on New Liberty Gold, an investigation that included
“desktop reviews, several meetings with Aureus management and a site
visit”.

Over the past decade, the IFC has spent more than $200 million on
projects like New Liberty Gold. It has a seemingly unshakable faith
that commercial mining can deliver development that will trickle
down to communities like Kinjor.

As for Siah: Her last-born is now buried. If she once believed the
promises of New Liberty Gold, that is certainly no longer the case.
“The company is doing nothing for us,” she told IRIN. “If the
company had built a hospital here, [his death] would not have
happened.”

********************************************************************

Aureus Mining: A Promise Betrayed; World Bank Funded Project Dashed
Hopes

Monrovia – Liberia’s first industrial gold mine failed to hold its
promises, dashing the hopes of local residents of Cape Mount County.

Report by  Alloycious David and Emmanuel Freudenthal

FrontPage Africa, March 20, 2017

http://tinyurl.com/lyxoff3

[Emmanuel Freudenthal is a freelance reporter investigating
businesses in Africa, while Alloycious David is an award winning
Liberian investigative journalist]

Contrary to President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf’s assurance that the New
Liberty Gold Mine will positively impact the lives of Liberians, the
325 families displaced by the mine have not yet moved into the
houses they had been promised.

The World Bank injected over US$ 19 million into the project with
the aim of bettering the lives of Liberians.

The houses should have been finished three years ago and now lie in
ruins, overtaken by grass. In the resettled town, called Kinjor,
residents still live in the inadequate structures that were meant to
host them temporarily.

There is no sign that their construction works will resume soon.

The company in charge of the project, Aureus Mining, now renamed
Avesoro, has also failed to construct a health post in Kinjor, as
required in an agreement between local residents and the company,
known as the ‘Resettlement Action Plan’.

Residents claimed that the absence of a health center is
contributing to untimely deaths.

Residents also complained that they did not receive adequate
compensation for the crops they lost when their farms were destroyed
to make way for the mine.

Gbaley Dorley, 32, alleged that his farm was completely destroyed by
the company. In exchange, he got less than a hundred United States
dollars in compensation for the cassava, coconut, and pineapple he
cultivated.

Another problem being experienced in Kinjor is safe drinking water.

Residents said the community, has less than five functional hand
pumps and that many of them do not work during the dry season.

The company’s operations, according to some residents poses health
hazard. Kulah Dassin, a 36-year-old mother of eight explained that
in March 2015, the company polluted their river with cyanide, which
killed all the fish.

The children, who usually bath and wash in the river, suffered from
rashes, which look like ringworm, she said.

Dassin disclosed that the application of traditional medicine has
helped to cure the rash, but that it is still visible on children.

The Town Chief of Jikandoh, called Pa Jimmy, corroborated that
hundreds of fish died, and related “I immediately placed a call to
the company’s management when we noticed that the fish were dying.”

Pa Jimmy explained that Debar Allen, the company’s manager, and a
team came quickly to collect water samples in the river and took
some of the dead fish back to their office.

Debar Allen, admitted that the company accidentally dumped cyanide
in the river but said the company has taken action to advert the
situation.

The company’s General Manager instructed them to stop using the
water.

In restitution for the pollution of their river, Aureus Mining
constructed two hand pumps to provide community members with safe
drinking water.

The company is compensating residents by providing them with cartons
of fish.

Although, the company or the Liberia Ministry of Health has not
provided official statement on the safety of the river, and no one
was examined by a doctor, community members have resumed bathing and
washing their clothes in the river.

The Liberia Environmental Protection Agency attempted to investigate
the leak, but said that the company obstructed its investigation,
which led to a US$ 10,000 fine for the company.

Allen further stated that construction work on the houses were
halted to focus more on the mining, because the company was running
out of funding, but contradicted himself and said individuals
resettled in new Kinjor were satisfied with where they staying and
that the company was thinking about what to do with the units when
they are completed.

The company’s ownership remains sealed in secrecy, Aureus Mining is
part of several shell companies registered in secrecy jurisdictions
and named in the Panama Papers.

The NEWS also unearthed that it has links to former President
Charles Taylor, who is currently serving a 50 year jail sentence for
war crimes committed in neighboring Sierra Leone.

Taylor’s former associate, the late Senator Keikurah B. Kpoto
created the Liberian subsidiary of Aureus Mining, the Bea Mountain
Mining Corp. This company was given a mining license under Taylor’s
government.

The World Bank and Aureus Mining failed to provide information on
inquire whether Taylor’s associates or some of his ex-officials
still hold shares in New Liberty Gold Mine and whether they are
aware that the project had link with Taylor.

Aureus Mining has not only failed to meet the aims for which the
World Bank infused over US$ 19 million into New Liberty Gold Mine,
but has created more sufferings, inflict pains and enriched
shareholders at the detriment of Liberia.

Via email, the bank disclosed that it conducted desktop review of
the project and held several meeting with Aureus Mining, but refused
to provide further information, because it entered a confidentiality
agreement with the company that prevents it from providing more
information on the project.

********************************************************************

84% of World Bank’s private investments in Sub-Saharan Africa go to
companies using tax havens

Oxfam International

11th Apr 2016

http://tinyurl.com/n2rpthk

Fifty-one of the 68 companies that were lent money by the World
Bank’s private lending arm in 2015 to finance investments in sub-
Saharan Africa use tax havens, Oxfam revealed today.

Oxfam’s new analysis focused on International Finance Corporation’s
(IFC) investments in Sub-Saharan Africa. It shows that together
these 51 companies, whose use of tax havens has no apparent link
with their core business, received 84 percent of IFC investments in
that region in 2015. It also reveals that the IFC has more than
doubled its investments in companies that use tax havens in just
five years – from $1.2billion in 2010 to $2.87billion in 2015.

The findings come ahead of the annual IMF-World Bank Spring meetings
starting on Wednesday in Washington DC, and in the wake of the
Panama Papers scandal which revealed how powerful individuals and
companies are using tax havens to hide wealth and dodge taxes. The
issue of tax havens is also expected to be high on the agenda at the
UK government’s Anti-Corruption Summit in London next month.

In Oxfam’s study, the most popular haven for IFC’s corporate clients
was Mauritius; 40 percent of IFC’s clients investing in Sub-Saharan
Africa have links there. Mauritius is known to facilitate “round-
tripping.” This is where a company shifts money offshore before
returning it disguised as foreign direct investment, which attracts
tax breaks and other financial incentives.

Sub-Saharan Africa is the poorest region in the world. It
desperately needs corporate tax revenues to invest in public
services and infrastructure. For example, the region lacks money to
provide enough skilled birth attendants, clean water or mosquito
nets, resulting in high rates of child mortality; one child in 12
dies before their fifth birthday.

Oxfam’s Head of Inequality, Nick Bryer, said: “It’s crazy to be
giving with one hand and taking away with another – the UK
government donates to the World Bank to encourage development, but
by allowing investments in tax havens the World Bank’s lending arm
is ultimately depriving poor countries of much-needed revenues to
fight poverty and inequality.”

“The World Bank Group should not risk funding companies that are
dodging taxes in Sub-Saharan Africa and across the globe. It needs
to put safeguards in place to ensure that its clients can prove they
are paying their fair share of tax.”

The IFC invested more than $86billion of public money in developing
countries between 2010 and 2015; 18.6 percent of it spent in Sub-
Saharan Africa. The IFC has a significant focus on financial
markets, infrastructure, agribusiness and forestry, among other
sectors.

While the IFC arguably leads the private sector with its disclosure,
environmental and social standards, the public still has no access
to information about where over half of the institution’s financing
ends up, because it is done through opaque financial intermediaries.
It also continues to face major challenges in measuring its overall
development impact, and ensuring that the projects it funds do not
harm local communities. This latest Oxfam research shows that the
organisation also has a long way to go in ensuring that its clients
are responsible tax payers.

Oxfam is calling for the IFC to develop new standards to ensure it
only invests in companies that have responsible corporate tax
practices. For example, companies should be transparent about their
economic activities so it is clear if they are paying their fair
share of tax where they do business.

The international agency is also calling on David Cameron to show
strong leadership in tackling tax havens, beginning by intervening
to ensure that the UK’s Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies
publish public registers revealing the true owners of companies
based there, ahead of the Anti-Corruption Summit in May.

Oxfam is urging the World Bank and IMF to work with governments
around the world to further reform the international tax system and
help prevent tax dodging by wealthy individuals and companies,
including action to end the era of tax havens. Tax dodging using tax
havens is estimated to cost poor countries $100billion in lost
revenues every year.

*****************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org

Africa/Global: Scaling Up Solar

AfricaFocus Bulletin
March 21, 2017 (170321)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

Even in the United States, where action on climate change is under
aggressive assault by climate deniers in the Trump
administration and Congress, renewable energy is projected to
continue to advance rapidly, on the basis of its still rapidly
growing cost advantages over fossil fuels. According to a report
just released by GTM research, the US total solar market, already
supplying the largest share of new power production, is poised to
triple over the next five years. The prospect for renewable energy
to power increased access to electricity in Africa is also dramatic,
according to a new report from the Africa Progress Panel.

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/clim1703.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/clim1703.php

In both developed countries and in regions where hundreds of
millions lack any access at all to electricity, the technical
capacity for rapid massive expansion of renewable energy supplies
has already been demonstrated. Scaling up, however, requires
financial innovation as well, and that still depends in large part
on public policy as well as private sector financing. Fortunately,
in Africa as well as at the global level, recognition of the
potential benefits is growing almost as fast as technical
innovation.

This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains opening remarks by Kofi Annan on
the launch of a new report by the Africa Progress Panel: “Lights,
Power, Action: Electrifying Africa.” The full report stresses the
central role of off-grid and mini-grid systems in providing access
to electricity for the estimated 620 million Africans currently
without such access. The report, too long and complexly formatted to
be excerpted here, is available in pdf format (http://tinyurl.com/jr8g7q8).

While acknowledging the role of extending the grid and some
continued reliance on large-scale power-production projects, the
report’s emphasis is the demonstrable untapped potential for scaling
up both small-scale household systems and community-level mini-
grids, both of which have been demonstrated in practice as cost-
effective.

Also included is the executive summary of a World Resources
Institute study published in December 2016, focusing particularly on
the remarkable success and even-greater potential of “pay-as-you-go”
solar systems, using the case studies of Kenya and Tanzania. The
principal obstacle to scaling up, the study concludes, is not
technical but rather financial. New forms of financing and seed
funds have enormous potential for expansion.

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on climate change and energy,
visit http://www.africafocus.org/intro-env.php

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

Opening remarks by Kofi Annan, Chair of the Africa Progress Panel,
at the launch of “Lights, Power, Action: Electrifying Africa” in
Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire on 13 March 2017.

Africa Progress Panel

http://tinyurl.com/k7t9cdl

Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am pleased to be with you in Abidjan this morning.

Achieving universal access to modern energy is critical to Africa’s
transformation.

The Africa Progress Panel, which I chair, welcomes the opportunity
to collaborate with the African Development Bank and other key
stakeholders in pushing for the changes we need to see.

It was in that spirit that I gladly accepted President Adesina’s
invitation last year to serve as a lead champion of the New Deal on
Energy in Africa. His leadership in positioning the AfDB at the
forefront of the New Deal process is precisely what is needed to
change the game for Africa.

The Africa Progress Panel first drew attention to the need for
bolder action to electrify Africa faster in our 2015 Report: “Power,
People, Planet: Seizing Africa’s Energy and Climate opportunities”.
Two years later, this need remains as urgent as ever.

Nearly two-thirds of Africans – 620 million people – still do not
have access to “affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern
electricity”, the energy goal that is central to Agenda 2030.

Africa’s energy deficit continues to stifle economic growth, job
creation, agricultural transformation, and improvements in health
and education. Meeting Sustainable Development Goal 7, the energy
goal, is a pre-condition for achieving many of the other goals.

The good news is that we are no longer in the dark, so to speak,
about how to tackle this challenge.

In several countries, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Morocco and South
Africa, renewable energy makes up an increasingly important share of
national power generation.

There are also a number of promising initiatives aimed at providing
electricity across borders, mostly drawing on renewable resources
such as solar, wind and hydro power.

We now need to see more of them deployed at far greater scale to
bring power and light to Africans who still lack modern energy.

That is the core message of the APP’s new report, Lights, Power,
Action: Electrifying Africa, which is launched today.

Traditional approaches to extending the grid are no longer viable as
the main option for African countries. They take too long and do not
meet the needs of our growing economies and societies. Instead,
governments and their partners need to re-imagine their energy
future.

We are not saying countries should immediately stop using fossil
fuels and switch to renewable sources of energy. As our report
clearly states, the cost of transitioning to renewables may be
prohibitively high in the short term – especially for countries that
use their sizeable endowments of coal and other fossil fuels to
generate energy.

What we are advocating is that African governments harness every
available energy option, so that no one is left behind. Each country
needs to decide on the most cost-effective, technologically
efficient energy mix that works best for its own needs.

To meeting rapidly growing demand, that energy mix will gradually
progress towards greater use of off-grid household systems and mini-
grids. It should also lead to the emergence of more flexible, hybrid
national energy systems that link grids to off-grid generation.

Mobile phone technology has already helped Africa to leapfrog over
conventional technology and to improve financial and social
inclusion. In the same way, we foresee that innovation will bring
millions of Africans into the energy loop, leading to better health,
better education, better access to markets, and better jobs.

Off-grid electricity generation used to be regarded in Africa as a
stop-gap measure – a way to power a few lights during the long wait
for a grid connection. In recent years, the number of households
connected to off-grid power has soared, improving millions of lives
while relieving a chronic shortage of power.

Some of these home systems may in future connect to grids through
buy-back schemes, enabling households to earn extra cash from the
power they generate. Such arrangements are already working in
Australia, some parts of Europe and the United States. Overall,
however, policy and regulatory environments in Africa need to
improve considerably to make such linkages reality.

As we document in our new report, off-grid solar products can act as
rungs on an “energy ladder”, providing a range of energy services to
households and enterprises with different energy needs and incomes.

Mini-grids can also offer sustainable permanent alternatives to
connecting to the grid, especially as reliable and affordable
products come on-stream that are attractive to small and medium-
sized enterprises as well as communities operating far from the
national grid.

The agenda is clear and the challenges are well known.

As well as leading the way in promoting wider use of off-grid and
mini-grid technology, African governments must continue to work hard
to transform national energy grids that are often unreliable and
financially fragile.

Many energy utilities are mismanaged and inefficient. A lack of
accountability and transparency in their governance also nurtures
corruption.

Electricity theft at staggering scale is often the result of this
malpractice; rolling black-outs are the result of mismanagement. All
continue to feed a deep sense of frustration among citizens.

They also highlight why power provision has become a highly
political issue in several countries.

Poor energy governance reflects the wider governance deficit that
threatens to derail development efforts in a number of countries.

So what do African governments and their partners need to do to make
this vision of an empowered Africa a reality?

Africa’s leadership, in both public and private sectors, needs to
step up and champion the “energy for all” agenda.

Governments need to intensify their efforts to put in place
regulatory environments that give the energy sector incentives to
deliver on its transformative potential.

The private sector, African and non-African, should be encouraged to
enter energy generation, transmission and distribution markets,
deepen linkages throughout the value chain, and build the investment
partnerships that can drive growth and create jobs.

While the onus is on African leadership and ownership of this
agenda, Africa’s energy future is also an issue of global relevance.
Although Africa only accounts for a tiny fraction of global
emissions, it wholeheartedly embraced the Paris climate agreement’s
overarching ambition – limiting global warming through unshakeable
and progressive commitment to a low-carbon planet.

The Paris commitment has led the industrialized countries to pledge
billions of dollars to supporting the low carbon transition, in
Africa and elsewhere. However, and as we have repeatedly highlighted
in our reports and our public advocacy, very little of that money is
moving yet.

Ladies and gentlemen,

As our new report shows, where there is good leadership, there are
excellent prospects for energy transition, and leaders in a number
of countries are demonstrating the levels and intensity of political
will needed to address these serious and persistent problems.

We urge governments to put in place the integrated plans and
policies that can scale up Africa’s energy transition. The success
of countries such as Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Morocco, Rwanda and
South Africa shows what can be achieved.

Achievements at the national level are essential but only part of
the solution. To fully address the energy challenges, governments
must collaborate more closely on a continental scale. Improved
cross-border power trade is crucial to realising Africa’s energy
potential. Yet less than 8 per cent of power is currently traded
across borders in Sub-Saharan Africa.

There is a glaring need to adopt a more continental approach to
power infrastructure development and management in order to
accelerate regional power integration.

This must involve a greater pooling of electricity resources and
harmonisation of national grids. Massive increases in investment in
regional transmission infrastructure and the development of new
power trading arrangements are also essential.

The ultimate goal should be to interlink Africa’s numerous and
fragmented power initiatives to create a single pan-African power
grid.

We know what is needed to reduce and ultimately eliminate Africa’s
energy deficit. Now we must focus on implementation.

The time for excuses is over.

It’s time for action.

**********************************************************

Stimulating Pay-As-You-Go Energy Access in Kenya And Tanzania: The
Role of Development Finance

World Resources Institute

Issue Brief

December 2016

Sanjoy Sanyal, Jeffrey Prins, Feli Visco, and Ariel Pinchot

http://tinyurl.com/mhsps2l

Executive Summary

Nearly 620 million people in sub-Saharan Africa lack electricity
access. Improving access to affordable and reliable energy is
critical to reducing poverty and improving quality of life (IEA
2011). To improve energy access, it is important to develop
financing and payment schemes that fit consumer energy budgets.
“Pay-as-you-go” (PAYG) business models harness technology to provide
a “one-stop-shop” solution for consumer finance and energy products.
The PAYG model originated in Kenya, and addresses the key challenges
of extending end-user finance and collecting payments from remote
customers who often have erratic and limited cash flow. PAYG
companies, at this point, typically provide basic lighting and
mobile phone charging services. The technology can play an important
role in expanding access to electricity services to remote and low-
income populations.

This issue brief draws on findings from desk research, workshops,
and inter views with PAYG companies, donors, and development finance
institutions (DFIs) active in energy access in East Africa to assess
how PAYG companies have stepped up to serve the approximately 35
million people in Kenya and 36 million people in Tanzania who lack
access to electricity, as well as additional millions who are
underserved. Our paper also draws on interviews with stakeholders
involved in Bangladesh’s IDCOL program to provide insight into how
DFIs and donors supported the Bangladesh program, in order to elicit
lessons relevant to the Kenyan and Tanzanian contexts. We chose
Bangladesh’s IDCOL program as a reference point for two reasons: the
energy enterprises in Bangladesh perform the same one-stop-shop role
as the PAYG companies, and IDCOL provides an example of where DFIs
have played a significant role in channeling finance (US$750
million) to achieve substantial energy access goals (three million
solar home systems).

Given the nascent stage of most energy access markets, much of the
existing PAYG literature focuses on analyzing the innovative
variations of business models as well as factors that could improve
the enabling environment. However, market players in both Kenya and
Tanzania have evolved beyond an early-stage pilot phase. These
pioneering companies have successfully raised grant, equity, and–
more recently– debt finance to pilot, develop, and scale their
businesses. According to our estimates, they have reached more than
half a million households through rapid sales growth. The market
overall is also evolving, as suggested by the participation of 52
international private sector investors–ranging from foundations  to
large companies–and five debt deals struck in 2015, the largest of
which was a US$45 million raise by one company. Market leaders such
as M-KOPA, Mobisol, and Off-Grid Electric have begun expanding into
regional markets.

While encouraging progress has been made, the addressable markets in
Kenya and Tanzania are much larger than those reached by existing
companies so far, and the products they offer need to be larger in
capacity if they are to provide more than basic lighting and mobile
charging. PAYG companies will require about one billion dollars
across these two countries to scale for broader impact. Therefore,
this issue brief focuses on how this broader impact can be created.
We look at how successful PAYG businesses operating in Kenya and
Tanzania have raised finance and the constraints faced by the
industry, and we propose recommendations for how donors and DFIs can
continue to support the development of these markets.

Currently, the various types of capital (debt, impact equity
capital, grant) that PAYG companies need are available almost
exclusively from international investors. Local financial
institutions in Kenya and Tanzania have been hesitant to provide
financing to PAYG customers: they perceive PAYG companies as early-
stage, risky businesses and are unfamiliar with the technology as
well as the creditworthiness of rural consumers. The absence of
local capital sources to some extent explains the fact that almost
all the successful PAYG companies are foreign owned and foreign
managed. Local companies often lack the initial resources, as well
as the networks and skills, to raise both early-stage capital and
develop complex financial structures to raise debt capital from
international markets. Local companies are also hesitant to take on
foreign currency risk.

Technological barriers to the PAYG business are falling, and the
sector is likely to see the entry of a larger number of companies.
This is not yet happening, because access to finance remains a key
entry barrier, particularly for locally owned and managed companies.
Finance is most critically needed to build out marketing, sales, and
service infrastructure and to provide customers with financing. The
relative lack of access to finance results in fewer companies and
less competition in the PAYG sector.

…

DFIs and donors have a role to play in supporting local financial
institutions to extend local currency debt. In Bangladesh,
international DFIs and donors channeled funds for energy access
through IDCOL, a government-owned financial intermediary. IDCOL also
played a strong role in market development. The market support roles
played by IDCOL can be adapted to the Kenyan and Tanzanian contexts.
The debt- financing role in Kenya and Tanzania can be played by
commercial banks from the very beginning. Involving commercial banks
would have the advantage of ensuring that funds are available to the
sector even after donors withdraw. …

Drawing on the success of the IDCOL program and the unique needs of
PAYG companies, we offer recommendations targeted primarily to DFIs
and donors regarding how they can support local financial
institutions in their efforts to expand energy access in Kenya and
Tanzania.

* International DFIs and donors can leverage their long relation-
ships with local financial institutions in Kenya and Tanzania to
stimulate local finance for the PAYG sector. DFIs and donors can
provide guarantee schemes and lines of credit to local banks. This
support would help banks develop a deeper understanding and
familiarity with PAYG business models, and make finance more
accessible to local companies. International DFIs and donors can
“crowd in” private sector investment in PAYG by channeling their
investments through fund of funds run by professional impact
investors and incentivize PAYG companies to invest in targeted
marketing and distribution infrastructure through results-based
financing. DFIs and donors can also provide technical assistance to
public organizations to support capacity building in monitoring and
verification.

* Local commercial banks can begin to explore the PAYG sec- tor, and
understand company cash flow patterns, through the provision of
short-term trade finance. They can also explore mechanisms such as a
debt ser vice coverage account to partially cover for default risks.

* National governments can provide support through a suite of policy
and regulatory measures to unlock domestic commercial financing for
distributed renewable energy including, for example, the development
of mechanisms to coordinate roles of institutions in this space and
encourage private sector activity by setting clear national
priorities and releasing grid extension plans to the public.

* Private sector investors can help companies to access different
types of capital and partnerships in response to evolving business
needs. This may include support for raising capital from local
commercial banks. Foundations and family offices can provide loss
guarantees to local banks.

* Private sector PAYG businesses can adopt standardized accounting
standards to assist in transactions with local banks.

The scope of this issue brief is confined to analysis of financing
in support of PAYG solar home system companies. While we recognize
that PAYG products providing lower-level energy services are not
comprehensive solutions to the energy access challenge, we believe
that our recommendations will also support the broader energy access
sector, including mini- and micro-grids.

Introduction

The Imperatives of the Electricity Access Challenge

Nearly 1.3 billion people, or 18 per cent of the world’s population,
still lack access to grid electricity (IEA 2014a). An additional one
billion are “under electrified,” a status charac terized by unstable
grid connection with regular power outages (A.T. Kearney and GOGLA
2014; IEA 2013). Sub-Saharan Africa bears a disproportionate share
of this burden. Over 620 million people, nearly two-thirds of the
region’s population, are without electricity access (IEA 2014b).
Increasing access to afford- able and reliable energy services is
fundamental to reducing poverty and improving other human
development indicators (IEA 2011).

Electricity access has long been measured by the physical connection
of a household to grid electricity or the presence of a nearby
electric pole. This binary definition of electricity access has
increasingly come into question in recent years, because it fails to
capture the quality of electricity services received by end users.
In response, the World Bank’s Energy Sector Management Assistance
Program (ESMAP) has developed a multi-tier framework for defining
and measuring levels of energy access. Under this approach, access
to electricity refers to the ability to obtain electricity that is
characterized by the following attributes: “adequate, available when
needed, reliable, of good quality, affordable, legal, convenient,
healthy and safe for all required applications across households,
productive enterprises and community institutions” (Angelou and
Bhatia 2015).

The framework measures electricity access across five tiers; each
tier reflects a specific level of performance of an electricity
supply system defined by the attributes. Tier 1 and Tier 2 are the
low-power capacity levels (minimum 3W and 50W, respectively). At
Tier 1 level, electricity access is defined as providing lighting
and mobile charging for a minimum of four hours per day. At Tier 2
level, access additionally includes the ability to power a fan
and/or television for four hours (see Annex II).

The PAYG businesses that we study in this issue brief provide
electricity access mainly at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels through
standalone solar home systems (SHSs). The standalone solar system
comes with a battery, a charge controller, a solar panel and LED
(light emitting diode) bulbs, and a mobile charger. Larger systems
(typically 50W and above) can potentially connect direct current
(DC) appliances such as a television. Even at lower tiers of
electricity access, there are numerous household-level benefits.
These benefits stem from the fact that the SHSs replace alternate
sources, which are often very expensive.

Previous WRI research conducted in collaboration with the
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis indicates that
household kerosene use is significantly lower for house- holds with
SHSs, even when compared with grid customers. While 80 percent of
households with access to grid electricity continue to use kerosene,
only about 25 percent of homes with SHSs use kerosene. The
reliability of SHS electricity supply may explain this finding (Rao,
Agarwal, and Wood 2016). Other research indicates benefits such as
prevention of GHG emissions (both carbon dioxide and black soot)
(Kaufman et al. 2000; Wang et al. 2011), increased household
disposable income because of reduced spending on kerosene and
candles (Mills 2005; Tracy and Jacobson 2012), health benefits such
as reduced accidents and indoor pollution (Mills 2014; Samad et al.
2013) and social benefits such as increased evening study hours for
children (A.T. Kearney and GOGLA 2014; Khan and Azad 2014; Samad et
al. 2013).

The Importance of “Pay-as- You-Go” (PAYG)

Previous WRI research has underscored the importance of designing
financing and payment schemes that fit consumer energy budgets. The
research notes that energy enterprises have to design innovative
financing and payment schemes to encourage consumers to purchase
their products, because customers are accustomed to buying energy in
small increments (Ballesteros et al. 2013). …

PAYG is a technology-driven method that allows consumers to pay the
lease amount for a given energy system or pay a fee for the service
of using the system. It uses information technology to enable remote
activation with payment receipt (Alstone et al. 2015). PAYG includes
a range of business models, which differ as to how payments are
accepted and to whom the ownership of the system ultimately
devolves. From the consumer’s point of view, the PAYG model offers a
one-stop shop, where the product and the financing are available
from the same source. The willingness of companies to finance
products gives customers confidence in the new technology. Indeed,
energy companies have tried to partner with microfinance
institutions (MFIs) but often with limited success. The energy
service companies have typically been smaller than their counterpart
MFIs, and partnerships have been hard to manage given the differing
expectations of the two parties. In Kenya, for example, consumers
could not access technical maintenance services from the energy
companies, which were limited in their geographic outreach. The poor
after-sales service left many customers dissatisfied with their
products, which in turn led to a refusal to repay loans (Rolffs,
Byrne, and Ockwell 2014).

The benefits of the PAYG model in providing a one-stop-shop solution
to customers are several. As we have already noted, the offer of
finance by the energy company instills trust in consumers regarding
the quality of the product. Operational efficiency is improved
because there is no need for coordination between finance providers
and technology providers. With PAYG, the companies are able to
provide longer-term loans than those usually offered by MFIs. PAYG
models also allow the provision of relatively large credit amounts
(to cover the cost of the renewable energy system) to consumers
whose credit worthiness may be unknown. The credit risk is partially
mitigated by the incentive system that links payments to service
provision. PAYG approaches, which use mobile communication
technologies, also reduce the costs associated with collecting
repayments (Rolffs, Byrne, and Ockwell 2014). Finally, PAYG enables
significant data collection. This gives enterprises the advantage of
understanding product performance and consumer behavior (Alstone et
al. 2015).

*****************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org

AfricaFocus Bulletin
March 14, 2017 (170314)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

“Famine ‘largest humanitarian crisis in history of UN’: UN
humanitarian chief says 20 million people in Yemen, South Sudan,
Somalia and Nigeria face starvation and famine,” says the headline
in Al Jazeera, echoed in the BBC and other international media, but
easily ignored without the high-intensity spotlight that
occasionally targets disasters with greater geostrategic centrality.
In the United States, while headlines rightly focus on the 24
million who would lose health care under the Republican Trumpcare
plan, no one has yet calculated the toll from a proposed 50% cut in
the U.S. budget for support of the UN.

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/hum1703.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/hum1703.php

No one would claim that the international humanitarian assistance
program is without major flaws, and UN officials quickly note
that it cannot solve the fundamental issues leading to disaster, in
particular military conflicts that in turn rest on political and
diplomatic failures. This is particularly notable in the four
countries mentioned in this most recent appeal, most dramatically in
Yemen where U.S.-backed Saudi intervention has not only directly
imposed massive civilian casualties but also blocked humanitarian
assistance.

The situation in the three remaining countries named, all in Africa,
varies, and the failures are both national and international.
Providing assistance will not resolve the fundamental issues. But
there can be little doubt that the weakening of the international
safety net will both cost lives and increase the difficulty of
addressing the underlying issues.

This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains, just below, links to several
recent articles, as well as the text of(1) the March 10 report to
the Security Council by UN Under Secretary-General Stephen O’Brien,
and (2) the press release from the Oslo conference in February on
the humanitarian crisis in north-eastern Nigeria and the Lake Chad
region.

Additional links to recent related articles of interest:

From Baidoa in Somalia, Kevin Sieff of the Washington Post reports
on visit by UN Secretary-General António Gutteres to Somalia, March
11, 2017.
http://tinyurl.com/gpvmmp2

“Famine ‘largest humanitarian crisis in history of UN’: UN
humanitarian chief says 20 million people in Yemen, South Sudan,
Somalia and Nigeria face starvation and famine,” Al Jazeera, March
11, 2017. http://tinyurl.com/jpdbowj
Includes link to 25-minute video special report

“UN: World facing greatest humanitarian crisis since 1945,” BBC,
March 11, 2017
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-39238808
Includes overview map and short video report on each country
mentioned

“‘Where is the help?’: black tea and dark despair as Somalia edges
closer to famine,” Guardian, March 10, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/gn3aksb

Colum Lynch, “White House Seeks to Cut Billions in Funding for
United Nations,” Foreign Policy, March 13, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/hg3n27b
“The budget proposal reinforces a shift by the Trump administration
from U.S. support for diplomacy and foreign assistance to increased
financial support for the U.S. military.”

Note that Yemen, the only non-African country on the UN’s list of
four most-affected countries, is, with Somalia, is on the list of
two countries the Trump administration is using as “test cases” for
loosening Obama administration rules on counterterrorism actions
outside designated combat zones (http://tinyurl.com/znwr2ct). “The
move to open the throttle on using military force — and accept a
greater risk of civilian casualties — in troubled parts of the
Muslim world comes as the Trump administration is also trying to
significantly increase military spending and cut foreign aid and
State Department budgets.”

On Thursday, March 9, 53 House Democrats wrote to Secretary of State
Tillerson, urging him to “use all U.S. diplomatic tools to help open
the Yemeni port of Hodeida to international aid humanitarian aid
organizations to allow them to import food, fuel, and medicine into
northern Yemen and save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Yemeni
children who face starvation.”
For more details and to sign a petition to support this, visit
http://tinyurl.com/z46z5az

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency
Relief Coordinator, Stephen O’Brien

Statement to the Security Council on Missions to Yemen, South Sudan,
Somalia and Kenya and an Update on the Oslo Conference on Nigeria
and the Lake Chad Region

10 March 2017

http://tinyurl.com/j6ojjz6

Mr. President, Council members,

Thank you for inviting me to brief on my visits to countries facing
famine or at risk of famine: Yemen, South Sudan and Somalia. I will
also briefly mention the outcomes of the Oslo Conference on the Lake
Chad Basin.

I need to mention that I also visited Northern Kenya where
pastoralists are worst affected by the terrible drought. Over 2.7
million Kenyans are now food insecure, a number likely to reach 4
million by April. In collaboration with the Government, the UN will
soon launch an appeal of $200 million to provide timely life-saving
assistance and protection. For what follows however, I will focus on
my other visits over the past 16 days.

Yemen

I turn first to Yemen. It’s already the largest humanitarian crisis
in the world and the Yemeni people now face the spectre of famine.
Today, two-thirds of the population – 18.8 million people – need
assistance and more than 7 million are hungry and do not know where
there next meal will come from. That is 3 million people more than
in January. As fighting continues and escalates, displacement
increases. With health facilities destroyed and damaged, diseases
are sweeping through the country.

I spoke with people in Aden, Ibb, Sana’a and from Taizz. They told
me horrific stories of displacement, escaping unspeakable violence
and destruction from Mokha and Taizz city in Taizz governorate. I
saw first-hand the effects of losing home and livelihood:
malnourishment, hunger and squalid living conditions in destroyed
schools, unfinished apartments and wet, concrete basements. In the
past two months alone, more than 48,000 people fled fighting, mines
and IEDs from Mokha town and the surrounding fields alone. I met
countless children, malnourished and sick. My small team met a girl
displaced to Ibb, still having shrapnel wounds in her legs while her
brother was deeply traumatized. I was introduced to a 13-year-old
girl who fled from Taizz city, left in charge of her seven siblings.
I spoke with families who have become displaced to Aden as their
homes were destroyed by airstrikes living in a destroyed school. All
of them told me three things: they are hungry and sick – and they
need peace so that they can return home.

I travelled to Aden on the first humanitarian UN flight, where I met
the President, Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of the Republic
of Yemen. I also met with the senior leadership of the Houthi and
General People’s Congress authorities in Sana’a. I discussed the
humanitarian situation, the need to prevent a famine and to better
respect international humanitarian law and protect civilians. I
demanded full, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access. All
counterparts promised to facilitate sustained access and respect
international humanitarian law. Yet all parties to the conflict are
arbitrarily denying sustained humanitarian access and politicize
aid. Already, the humanitarian suffering that we see in Yemen today
is caused by the parties and proxies and if they don’t change their
behaviour now, they must be held accountable for the inevitable
famine, unnecessary deaths and associated amplification in suffering
that will follow.

Despite the almost impossible and terrifying conditions, the UN and
humanitarian partners are not deterred and are stepping up to meet
the humanitarian needs across the country. In February alone, 4.9
million people received food assistance. We continue to negotiate
access and make modest gains. For instance, despite assurances from
all parties of safe passage to Taizz city, I was denied access and
retreated to a short safe distance when I and my team came under
gunfire. Yet, we managed to use this experience to clear the path
for reaching people inside Taizz city with a first humanitarian
truck delivery of eight tons of essential medicine on the Ibb to
Taizz city road since August 2016. We will not leave a stone
unturned to find alternative routes. We must prevail as so many
lives depend on us, the full range of the humanitarian family.

For 2017, the humanitarian community requires US$ 2.1 billion to
reach 12 million people with life-saving assistance and protection
in Yemen. Only 6 per cent of that funding has been received thus
far. An international ministerial-level pledging event is scheduled
for 25 April, but the situation is so dire that I ask donors to give
urgently now. All contributions and pledges since 1 January will be
counted at the event.

I continue to reiterate the same message to all: it is only a
political solution that will ultimately end human suffering and
bring stability to the region. And at this stage, only a combined
response with the private sector can stem a famine: commercial
imports must be allowed to resume through all entry points in Yemen,
including and especially Hudaydah port, which must be kept open and
expanded. With access and funding, humanitarians will do more, but
we are not the long-term solution to this growing crisis.

I am pleased as I said to confirm that a ministerial-level pledging
event for the humanitarian response in Yemen for 2017 will take
place in Geneva on 25 April. The Secretary-General will chair the
event, co-hosted by the Foreign Ministers of Sweden and Switzerland,
to advocate for more resources and access. For 2017, as mentioned,
the Yemen humanitarian response plan asks for US $2.1 billion to
assist 12 million people in need across all 22 governorates.

South Sudan

Turning to South Sudan which I visited on 4 and 5 March. The
situation is worse than it has ever been. The famine in South Sudan
is man-made. Parties to the conflict are parties to the famine – as
are those not intervening to make the violence stop.

More than 7.5 million people need assistance, up by 1.4 million from
last year. About 3.4 million people are displaced, of which almost
200,000 have fled South Sudan since January alone. A localized
famine was declared for Leer and Mayendit [counties] on 20 February,
an area where violence and insecurity have compromised humanitarian
access for years. More than one million children are estimated to be
acutely malnourished across the country; including 270,000 children
who face the imminent risk of death should they not be reached in
time with assistance. Meanwhile, the cholera outbreak that began in
June 2016 has spread to more locations.

I travelled to Ganyiel in Unity state where people have fled from
the horrors of famine and conflict. I saw the impact humanitarians
can have to alleviate suffering. I met an elderly woman with her
malnourished grandson receiving treatment. I listened to women who
fled fighting with their children through waist-high swamps to
receive food and medicine. Some of these women have experienced the
most appalling acts of sexual violence – which continues to be used
as a weapon of war. Their harrowing stories are only a few among
thousands who have suffered a similar fate across the country.

Humanitarians are delivering. Last year, partners reached more than
5.1 million people with assistance. However, active hostilities,
access denials and bureaucratic impediments continue to curtail
their efforts to reach people who desperately need help. Aid workers
have been killed; humanitarian compounds and supplies have been
attacked, looted, and occupied by armed actors. Recently,
humanitarians had to leave one of the famine-affected counties
because of fighting. Assurances by senior Government officials of
unconditional access and no bureaucratic impediments now need to be
turned into action on the ground.

Somalia In Somalia, more than half the population – 6.2 million
people – need humanitarian and protection assistance, including 2.9
million who are at risk of famine and require immediate assistance
to save or sustain their lives, close to 1 million children under
the age of 5 will be acutely malnourished this year. In the last two
months alone, nearly 160,000 people have been displaced due to
severe drought conditions, adding to the already 1.1 million people
who live in appalling conditions around the country.

What I saw and heard during my visit to Somalia was distressing –
women and children walk for weeks in search of food and water. They
have lost their livestock, water sources have dried up and they have
nothing left to survive on. With everything lost, women, boys, girls
and men now move to urban centres.

With the Secretary-General – his first field mission since he took
office – we visited Baidoa. We met with displaced people going
through ordeals none of us can imagine. We visited the regional
hospital where children and adults are desperately fighting to
survive diarrhoea, cholera and malnutrition. Again, as if proof was
needed, it was clear that between malnutrition and death there is
disease.

Large parts of southern and central Somalia remain under the control
or influence of Al-Shabaab and the security situation is volatile.
Last year, some 165 violent incidents – an 18 per cent increase
compared to 2015 – directly impacted humanitarian work and resulted
in 14 deaths of aid workers. Al-Shabaab, Government Forces and other
militia also continue to block major supply routes to towns in 29 of
the 42 districts in southern and central Somalia. This has
restricted access to markets, basic commodities and services, and is
severely disrupting livelihoods. Blockades and double taxation bar
farmers from transporting their grains. It is critical that AMISOM
and Somali forces secure vital road access to enable both lifesaving
aid and longer term recovery. A lot of hope is placed in the new
Government.

The current indicators mirror the tragic picture of 2011, when
Somalia last suffered a famine. It is important to add that when the
famine was called at that time 260,000 had already died, this will
be important in what I am about to tell you. However, humanitarian
partners now have a larger footprint, mature cash programming,
better data through assessments, better controls on resources and
vetting of partners, as well as stronger partnership with government
authorities. The Government recently declared the drought a national
disaster and is taking steps to work with humanitarian partners to
ensure a coordinated response. To be clear, we can avert a famine,
we have a committed clear new President, a humanitarian and
resilience track record, a detailed plan, we’re ready despite
incredible risk and danger, we have local and international
leadership, we have a lot of access, now we need the international
community, at the scale of you the donor agencies and nations, to
invest in Somalia, its life-saving – but we need those huge funds
now.

For all three crises and North-Eastern Nigeria, an immediate
injection of funds plus safe and unimpeded access are required to
enable partners to avert a catastrophe; otherwise, many people will
predictably die from hunger, livelihoods will be lost, and political
gains that have been hard- won over the last few years will be
reversed. To be precise we need $4.4 billion by July, and that’s a
detailed cost, not a negotiating number.

Oslo Conference Before I visited all these countries, I was in Oslo,
where the governments of Norway, Germany and Nigeria, in partnership
with the United Nations, organized a humanitarian conference on
Nigeria and the Lake Chad region. 10.7 million people need
humanitarian assistance and protection, including 7.1 million people
who are severely food insecure. Humanitarian partners scaled up
their response to reach the most vulnerable groups threatened by
violence, food insecurity and famine, particularly in North-Eastern
Nigeria.

Fourteen donors pledged a total of US$672 million, of which $458
million is for humanitarian action in 2017. This is very good news,
and I commend those who made such generous pledges. More is needed
however to receive the $1.5 billion required to provide the
assistance needed across the Lake Chad region.

We stand at a critical point in history. Already at the beginning
of the year we are facing the largest humanitarian crisis since the
creation of the United Nations. Now, more than 20 million people
across four countries face starvation and famine. Without
collective and coordinated global efforts, people will simply
starve to death. Many more will suffer and die from disease.
Children stunted and out of school. Livelihoods, futures and hope
will be lost. Communities’ resilience rapidly wilting away.
Development gains reversed. Many will be displaced and will
continue to move in search for survival, creating ever more
instability across entire regions. The warning call and appeal for
action by the Secretary-General can thus not be understated. It was
right to take the risk and sound the alarm early, not wait for the
pictures of emaciated dying children or the world’s TV screens to
mobilise a reaction and the funds.

The UN and humanitarian partners are responding. We have strategic,
coordinated and prioritised plans in every country. We have the
right leadership and heroic, dedicated teams on the ground. We are
working hand-in-hand with development partners to marry the
immediate life-saving with longer term sustainable development. We
are ready to scale up. This is frankly not the time to ask for more
detail or use that postponing phrase, what would you prioritize?
Every life on the edge of famine and death is equally worth saving.

Now we need the international community and this Council to act:

First and foremost, act quickly to tackle the precipitating factors
of famine. Preserving and restoring normal access to food and
ensuring all parties’ compliance with international humanitarian law
are key.

Second, with sufficient and timely financial support, humanitarians
can still help to prevent the worst-case scenario. To do this,
humanitarians require safe, full and unimpeded access to people in
need. Parties to the conflict must respect this fundamental tenet of
IHL and those with influence over the parties must exert that
influence now.

Third, stop the fighting. To continue on the path of war and
military conquest is – I think we all know – to guarantee failure,
humiliation and moral turpitude, and will bear the responsibility
for the millions who face hunger and deprivation on an incalculable
scale because of it.

Allow me to very briefly sum up. The situation for people in each
country is dire and without a major international response, the
situation will get worse. All four countries have one thing in
common: conflict. This means we – you – have the possibility to
prevent – and end – further misery and suffering. The UN and its
partners are ready to scale up. But we need the access and the funds
to do more. It is all preventable. It is possible to avert this
crisis, to avert these famines, to avert these looming human
catastrophes.

********************************************************

Oslo humanitarian conference for Nigeria and the Lake Chad region
raises $672 million to help people in need

UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 24 Feb 2017

http://tinyurl.com/zu9l5za

Oslo 24 February 2017 – Some 170 representatives from 40 countries,
UN, regional organisations and civil society organisations gathered
at the Oslo Humanitarian Conference on Nigeria and the Lake Chad
Region today. The conference was co-hosted by Norway, Nigeria,
Germany and the UN and followed a civil society meeting with large
participation from local organisations working in Nigeria, Chad,
Niger and Cameroon.

One of the world’s largest humanitarian crises is currently
unfolding in the Lake Chad region with 17 million people living in
the most affected areas. Nearly 11 million people urgently need
humanitarian assistance. At the conference, 14 donors pledged $458
million for relief in 2017 and an additional $214 million was
announced for 2018 and beyond. Pledges were announced by the
European Commission, Norway, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Switzerland,
France, Italy, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Luxembourg, Netherlands
and Republic of Korea.

Humanitarian partners agreed to further scale up their response to
reach the most vulnerable groups threatened by famine, including
children with severe acute malnutrition. Special attention was given
to the protection needs of women, children and youth, as well as the
need for longer-term support and durable solutions for the displaced
populations.

Foreign Minister Borge Brende of Norway said:

“The conference has helped raising awareness and increased support
for millions of people affected by this crisis, not least for the
many children and young people who are currently out of school. It
is crucial to provide and protect education to safeguard their
rights and pave the way for a peaceful development in the region.
Our goal must be to ensure quality education for all, for girls as
much as for boys. It is of critical importance also to enhance the
protection of women and girls, who often carry the main burden of
crisis and conflict, and ensure that women are involved in ongoing
processes related to peace and development in the region.”

The Foreign minister of Nigeria, Geoffrey Onyeama, said:

“Nigeria is suffering from violent extremism at the same time as it
is dealing with low oil prices and an economic recession. While the
Government is committing significant budgetary allocations to
confront the security and humanitarian situation arising from the
insurgency, we also need all the help and support we can get from
the international community.”

The Foreign Minister of Germany, Sigmar Gabriel, said:

“With today’s pledges, humanitarian agencies can now concentrate on
their work – to save lives and offer help to those in urgent need.
Germany contributes 120 million Euro over the course of the next
three years to those efforts. We will provide 100 million Euro for
humanitarian assistance and 20 million Euro for stabilization
efforts in the region. In the long run, we have to strengthen our
partnership with the countries involved to address the root causes
of terror, displacement and poverty. For that purpose, we
established today a Consultative Group on Prevention and
Stabilisation with our counterparts from the region.”

United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and
Emergency Relief Coordinator Stephen O’Brien said:

“The humanitarian crisis in the Lake Chad Region is truly massive
with a staggering 10.7 million people in need of immediate
humanitarian assistance. Without our increased support, affected
communities will face a life of hunger, disease, gender-based
violence and continued displacement. But there is another future
within grasp: as the international community scales up support, we
can stop a further descent into an ever-deepening crisis with
unimaginable consequences for millions of people. I am grateful for
the generous support to humanitarian action we have heard this
morning. The UN and our partners are ready and mobilised to further
scale up our life-saving response – the people in the region have no
time to wait.”

*****************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org

2017-02-23 06:06

http://www.news24.com/Africa/Zimbabwe/whites-want-us-to-keep-working-for-them-mugabe-20170222

Harare – Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe says he’s worried that whites “have taken over once again” – especially on some farms.

In a long interview with state TV to mark his 93rd birthday, Mugabe said he was proud that “most of the land that used to be in the hands of the settlers is now in the hands of our own people”.

But he said some blacks had “surreptitiously” handed over management of their farms to whites, an apparent reference to the new black commercial farmers who employ dispossessed white farmers on their land.

Mugabe said: “Stupid stupid we, as indeed we are doing that.”

“There are [some blacks] who have really gone to sleep and the whites have taken over once again and it’s sad, isn’t it?” he added.

Under Mugabe’s land reform programme, around 4 000 white-owned farms were redistributed to blacks beginning in 2000. It’s not clear how many whites are back working on the land as managers, though News24 has heard of a number of cases. Around 300 whites particularly dairy farm owners, still own their farms though in many cases they have been forced to downsize.

With foreign direct investment at a low in Zimbabwe, the president also hit out at some blacks who he said waited for whites to invest “and then they go and work for” them.

Said the longtime Zimbabwe leader, whose birthday party will be held on Saturday: “Have we become the masters of our own economy or are we still, you know, thinking of whites as the best entrepreneurs and Africans as the labourers?”

He added: “Of course the whites would be happy to see us continue to work for them.”

AfricaFocus Bulletin
March 6, 2017 (170306)
(Reposted from sources cited below)

Editor’s Note

“In the post-apartheid South Africa, resurgence of xenophobic
violence is a symptom of the deep leadership deficit. For the fourth
consecutive week now, South Africa is witnessing what many analysts
call a “resurgence” of xenophobic violence in parts of Johannesburg
and Pretoria, the country’s capital city. The reality is that this
type of violence is a daily occurrence in the country, although it
does not always get media attention. It has, in fact, become a long-
standing feature in post-apartheid South Africa.” – Jean Pierre
Misago, African Centre for Migration and Society, Johannesburg

For a version of this Bulletin in html format, more suitable for
printing, go to http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/migr1703.php, and
click on “format for print or mobile.”

To share this on Facebook, click on
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http://www.africafocus.org/docs17/migr1703.php

South Africa is not unique in seeing a “resurgence” of anti-
immigrant violence this year. As in many other countries, notably
the United States and many European countries, this trend draws on
widespread prejudice among substantial sectors of citizens against
immigrants seen as criminal and job-takers. But it is also driven by
official state policy which employs its own official bureaucratic
violence, by the “leadership deficit” cited by Misago, and by even
more massive and multifaceted anti-immigrant campaigns such as that
currently being mobilized by the new U.S. administration.

This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains three short articles with news
and analysis of the most recent events in South Africa, as well as
links to other sources for deeper analysis.

Additional short articles and reports of related interest, including
reactions from other African countries:

Omano Edigheji, “Xenophobia in South Africa and Nigeria,” Sahara
Reporters, February 26, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/hfqya5d

Simon Allison, “South Africa has become the Bad Guy in Africa,”
Daily Maverick, February 26, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/jm9qlxm

Alexandra Hiropoulos, “Gauteng Xenophobic Attacks February 2017,”
Xenowatch, February 26, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/jm6xnmr

And for contemporary US parallels, see Anand Giridharadas, “A Murder
in Trump’s America,” The Atlantic, February 28, 2017, at
http://tinyurl.com/zv8ucb9
On murders of immigrants, including the most recent shooting in
Kansas.

Laila Lalam, “Donald Trump Is Making America White Again,” The
Nation, March 2, 2017
By Laila Lalami

Donald Trump Is Making America White Again

Holland Carter, “For Migrants Headed North, the Things They Carried
to the End,” New York Times, March 3, 2017
Art exhibit on deadly results of U.S. immigration policy in desert
on Mexican border, from Clinton through Obama

Emily Bazelon, “Department of Justification,” New York Times
Magazine, February 28, 2017
On the anti-immigrant agenda of Jeff Sessions, Stephen Bannon, and
Donald Trump.
http://tinyurl.com/jxsb4af

Additional sources on the anti-immigrant attitudes and the Trump
election campaign can be found at
http://www.noeasyvictories.org/usa/anti-immigrant.php

For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on migration and related issues,
visit http://www.africafocus.org/migrexp.php

Of special interest is the 2014 article by Sisonke Msimang,
“Belonging–why South Africans refuse to let Africa in,” –
http://www.africafocus.org/docs14/sa1410.php

++++++++++++++++++++++end editor’s note+++++++++++++++++

Xenophobic violence in the ‘Rainbow’ nation

by Jean Pierre Misago

Al Jazeera, March 1, 2017

http://tinyurl.com/hggn89u

[Jean Pierre Misago is a researcher with the African Centre for
Migration and Society at the University of the Witwatersrand, South
Africa.]

[Text only. Original at link above contains additional links to many
other sources.]

In the post-apartheid South Africa, resurgence of xenophobic
violence is a symptom of the deep leadership deficit.

For the fourth consecutive week now, South Africa is witnessing what
many analysts call a “resurgence” of xenophobic violence in parts of
Johannesburg and Pretoria, the country’s capital city.

The reality is that this type of violence is a daily occurrence in
the country, although it does not always get media attention. It
has, in fact, become a long-standing feature in post-apartheid South
Africa.

Since 1994, tens of thousands of people have been harassed, attacked
or killed because of their status as outsiders or foreign nationals.

Despite claims to the contrary by the government, violence against
foreign nationals in South Africa did not end in June 2008 when the
massive outbreak that started a month earlier subsided.

As the current incidents illustrate, hostility towards foreign
nationals is still pervasive in the country and continues to result
in more cases of murder, injuries, threats of mob violence, looting
and the destruction of residential property and businesses, as well
as mass displacement.

And yes, the violence is xenophobic (and not “just crime”, as many
in government prefer labelling it) because it is – as the scholar
Belinda Dodson reminds us – “an explicit targeting of foreign
nationals or outsiders for violent attacks despite other material,
political, cultural or social forces that might be at play”.

It is a hate crime whose logic goes beyond the often accompanying
and misleading criminal opportunism. The real motive of the
violence, as unambiguously expressed by the perpetrators themselves,
is to drive foreign populations out of communities.

Xenophobic violence as a symptom of leadership deficit

A quick analytical look reveals that the drivers of ongoing
xenophobic violence in South Africa, as well as the lack of
effective response and preventive interventions, reflect a dreadful
lack of competent, decisive and trusted leadership at all levels of
government.

The drivers of xenophobic violence in South Africa are inevitably
multiple and embedded in a complex interplay of the country’s past
and present structural – political, social and economic – factors.

Chief among underlying causal factors is obviously the prevailing
anti-immigrant sentiment easily fuelled by political scapegoating.
Political leaders and officials of the national, provincial and
local government often blame foreign nationals for their systemic
failures to deliver on the political promises and satisfy the
citizenry’s growing expectations.

Due to political scapegoating, many South African citizens perceive
foreign nationals as a serious threat that needs to be eliminated by
any means necessary. This perception is stronger among the majority
of citizens living in poor townships and informal settlements where
they meet and fiercely compete with equally poor African immigrants
for scarce resources and opportunities.

The result is that local residents in these areas have become
increasingly convinced that foreign nationals are to blame for all
their socioeconomic ills and hardships including poverty,
unemployment, poor service delivery, lack of business space and
opportunities; crime; prostitution; drug and alcohol abuse; and
deadly diseases.

By blaming foreign nationals for its failures to deliver on its core
functions and responsibilities, the South African government is
unfortunately displaying an obvious if sorry sign of weak and
incompetent leadership.

The triggers of the violence paint an even more worrying picture of
the leadership deficit in the “rainbow” nation. Indeed, the strong
anti-immigrant sentiment alone cannot explain the occurrence of
violence in some areas and not in others where such negative
attitudes are equally strong.

Attitudes are not always a good predictor of behaviour. Rather ample
research evidence indicates that the triggers of the violence are
located in the “micropolitics” at play in many of country’s towns
townships and informal settlements.

Instigators and perpetrators of xenophobic violence are well known
in their respective communities, but the de facto impunity they
enjoy only means that they are likely – as they have in many cases –
to strike again.

Violent attacks on foreign nationals are usually triggered by
political mobilisation led by local economic and/or political
players and informal community leadership groups (in the form of
civic organisations, community policing forums, business
associations, concerned residents’ associations, etc) for their
economic and political interests.

This violence is essentially “politics by other means”. It has
proved a useful tool for these local politicians to consolidate
their power and community leadership monopoly needed to expand their
client base and the economic revenues it represents.

These “violence entrepreneurs” capitalise on people’s sentiments and
frustrations and have no difficulty co-opting local residents for
participation in the violence given the pervasive negative
attitudes. Xenophobic violence is triggered by the mobilisation of
the existing collective discontent.

With denialism and impunity, violence continues

It is common knowledge that the official South African government’s
response to xenophobia and related violence has been characterised
by “denialism”.

Such denialism is rooted in a discourse which labels all xenophobic
violence as “just crime and not xenophobia”, a categorisation that
demands few specific and sustained interventions or policy changes.

Both President Jacob Zuma and Minister of Home Affairs Malusi Gigaba
repeated the popular if infamous refrain this week.

Perhaps understandably, admitting the existence of a xenophobic
citizenry is both ideologically and politically uncomfortable for
the ruling African National Congress, which is now the custodian of
the multiracial, multi-ethnic “rainbow” nation and sees itself as
the champion of human rights and unity in diversity.

In addition to the lack of effective policy response, the government
unwillingness to recognise xenophobia coupled with a general weak
judicial system has also led to an alarming culture of impunity and
lack of accountability for perpetrators and mandated institutions:
foreign nationals have been repeatedly attacked in South Africa
since 1994 but few perpetrators have been charged, even fewer
convicted. In some instances, state agents have actively protected
those accused of anti-foreigner violence.

Similarly, there have been no efforts to hold mandated institutions
such as the police and the intelligence community accountable for
their failure to prevent and stop violence despite visible warning
signs.

As an example, government promises to set up special courts to
enable quick prosecutions after the 2008 and 2015 violence never
materialised.

Instigators and perpetrators of xenophobic violence are well known
in their respective communities, but the de facto impunity they
enjoy only means that they are likely – as they have in many cases –
to strike again.

Unfortunately, the government’s unwillingness to acknowledge that
this violence is xenophobic and its failure to work on finding
appropriate solutions are a sign of ineffective leadership. Without
appropriate intervention violence will continue.

**********************************************************

Black lives don’t matter in xenophobic South Africa

Redi Tlhabi

Washington Post, March 2, 2017

http://tinyurl.com/hved2oz

Redi Tlhabi is a radio and television journalist from Johannesburg.

Last week was an ugly, humiliating one for South Africa; a country
once considered a jewel of democracy on the African continent has
been gripped by a wave of xenophobic violence. In a matter of days,
more than 30 stores belonging to foreign nationals were shut down
after intense attacks and looting by locals in several townships. We
are breathing a sigh of relief that there has been no loss of life.

This is not the first time that foreigners have faced attacks in
South Africa’s townships and provinces. In 2008, the country’s
streets were ablaze, literally, with violence against foreigners.
Ernesto Alfabeto Nhamuave, a national from Mozambique, was beaten,
stabbed and set on fire in broad daylight. A police officer tried in
vain to douse the flames, but it was too late. Nhamuave died. And
there has been no justice for him. Sixty-two people, including South
Africans, were killed at that time and more than 100,000 were
displaced. Last year, more than 20 shops were looted in one area
alone, and foreign nationals had to flee their homes.

On Friday, with the government’s endorsement, citizens from
Pretoria, the capital, marched against foreign nationals in an anti-
immigrant protest. The government said that the march was an
agitation against crime in South Africa, which has been endemic in
this society for many years. Yet the protesters did not march to
police headquarters; instead they went to the Home Affairs office,
which is in charge of immigration in the country.

The xenophobic violence tends to have a racial element. Nigerians,
Somalis, Malawians, Pakistanis and Zimbabweans are often the targets
of this prejudice. Perhaps it reflects the complex truth about South
Africa’s xenophobia — that it is never just a rejection of a
different identity but also a lament for the economic exclusion
experienced by black South Africans, or all black Africans, for that
matter. The acts of violence are specifically targeted at African
and Asian migrants. White migrants are safe. They own businesses and
property and generally go about their lives peacefully. They are
seen as providers of work and capital, but black ones are seen as
encroachments and threats. They are from the margins of our society,
and even the language used to describe them — illegal immigrants,
illegal aliens, outsiders — creates an “us and them” dynamic. They
are dirty, they are criminals, they are drug peddlers — common
accusations that are articulated boldly on radio and television.

It is surreal as we watch how here and in the United States, black
lives really don’t matter. Even in a majority black country, the
government is not decisive or unequivocal in its condemnation,
choosing instead to obfuscate and sanitize this xenophobia by
calling it something else, such as “criminal acts.” These are hate
crimes, no different from the killing of Indian engineer Srinivas
Kuchibhotla in the United States. The suspect reportedly asked him
and a companion whether they had valid visas and shouted that they
should “get out of my country.” This sounds so familiar. Migrants in
South Africa are constantly told to “go back home.” We have not
experienced random shootings by citizens, but rather a well-
orchestrated, mass uprising by multitudes. And in this way,
individuals escape personal responsibility for hate crimes.

Nelson Mandela, the founding father of our democracy, said: “South
Africans must produce an actual South African reality that will
reinforce humanity’s belief in justice. … Never, never and never
again shall it be that this beautiful land will again experience the
oppression of one by another.”

We have failed. According to the Migration Policy Institute, South
Africa displays one of the highest levels of xenophobia in the
world. In the past decade, foreigners have been blamed for every
malaise under the sun — “They are stealing our jobs,” “committing
crimes” and, of course, “taking our women.” High levels of
unemployment — especially youth unemployment, which averaged 51
percent between 2013 and 2016 — creates a fertile environment for
foreign workers to be scapegoats, despite the fact that foreign-born
migrants make up only 1.6 million of South Africa’s population of
about 55 million.

South Africans must remember the sagacity and generosity extended to
us in our time of need. African countries took on South Africa’s
liberation movements when they were banned by apartheid. They
provided a home and education for their families. Some of these
governments provided financial help to the party that is in
government in South Africa today. I am hoping that the divisions
that colonialism and racism tried to engineer in our psyche will not
prevail. I am hoping that citizens who endeavor to make their
countries “great again” will not do so at the expense of basic
decency and justice.

********************************************

The awful politics of xenoophobia

by Stephen Grootes

Daily Maverick, February 27, 2017

http://tinyurl.com/jhx7pf4

South Africans have a certain reputation for public robustness. We
fight, scream, and shout at each other, all in the name of deciding
what would make for a better country. At times, though, this
robustness threatens to derail us at a time when many people could
be vulnerable to serious harm. On Friday in Pretoria, violence broke
out during a march planned by people who were “opposed to illegal
immigrants”. The police struggled to maintain order. And instead of
speaking with one voice, everyone in a leadership position was busy
pointing fingers, particularly at Joburg Mayor Herman Mashaba.

There was plenty of notice that xenophobic violence was coming. In
stark contrast to the violence that claimed nearly 60 lives in 2008,
and the awfulness that marked the violence in KwaZulu-Natal two
years ago, last week we knew that a group of people in Mamelodi were
going to march against the presence of foreign nationals in their
community. They said that it was a march against crime, but when
pushed on their motives it became clear that the real issue was
simply that they did not like people who were not like them.

When the marching and the clashes started on Friday, the police
immediately moved to contain the protests. A group of Somali men
grouped together, partly perhaps for protection, partly perhaps to
cause their own violence. This was the kind of thing that only leads
to trouble. One of the oldest insults among human beings can be
boiled down to this: He is a foreigner, and therefore a barbarian.
And it is also universal among societies everywhere; when people
feel their lives are getting worse and hopeless, they will turn on
people they see as different, or somehow not being “like them”.

Situations like these need cool heads, and plenty of disciplined
force from the police. But a problem of this kind also needs
leadership.

On Friday morning, the ANC released a statement about the xenophobic
violence, essentially calling for calm. But by the third paragraph
of the statement, it was already attacking Johannesburg Mayor Herman
Mashaba, saying he should be “singled out for particular mention”,
and attempting to blame him for the violence. They claimed further
that “it was the reckless statements of Mayor Mashaba that lit the
tinderbox of hatred in the first place”.

Where the ANC is absolutely correct is to criticise Mashaba for his
words and actions on this issue in the last few months. His comments
about “illegal immigrants”, and his almost wilful and deliberate
conflation of the words “immigrants” and “criminals”, was wrong,
perhaps bordering on the criminal. As a public representative, he
should be ashamed of himself, and the DA should be ashamed of itself
for not smacking him down in public. His comments in this regard are
surely against everything the DA claims to stand for.

It is hard to know why Mashaba made them in the first place. Maybe
he genuinely believes there is a problem and that it needs to be
addressed. Perhaps he feels that it’s a way to get votes. As the US
and other places have recently demonstrated again, being “anti-
immigrant” can play successfully to prejudice. Or he could just be
prejudiced himself, like so many other South Africans, and people
all over the world.

But to say that he is responsible is to utterly miss the greater
context of what is happening in South Africa these days. And, worse,
it is to forget the role the ANC government played over the last few
years.

Last week, before the march, Home Affairs Minister Malusi Gigaba
held a press conference specifically about the xenophobic tensions.
He said he had met with the organisers of the march, and had pleaded
with them to act responsibly. It was the kind of act that you would
expect someone in his position to do; it was the right thing to do.
Unfortunately, his department could also be accused of playing a
role in demonising foreign nationals in the first place. It is his
officials who deport people, and decide which foreign nationals get
to stay and which get to be kicked out. And, depending on where you
stand on these things, it is also his department that has largely
failed to deal with the problem. The perception has grown that
people who are foreign are here illegally, because government has
failed to stop them from being here.

But it is not only Gigaba’s fault. It is impossible to police this
properly, the dynamics of economics, geography and the human nature
to desire a better life for yourself and your children are all
against him. With the best will in the world, Gigaba is going to be
unable to change those perceptions, or even make much of a
difference on the ground. Stopping human migration requires the kind
of a control over a population that North Korea has. Anything less
will just not work.

Gigaba himself has a fairly decent track record in this regard. He
at least is not afraid to call xenophobia what it is, and to label a
xenophobic march a xenophobic march. His political boss, President
Jacob Zuma, appears unable to do even that, claiming on Friday that
there were even foreign nationals in these marches, because they
were actually “anti-crime”. Proof, once again, that it’s not only
the facts that are alternative, sometimes it’s the entire universe.

Gigaba once did something that very few other ministers have done on
this issue. He raised the ire of Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini. In
2015 Zwelithini had been accused of making comments that were seen
as an incitement to commit violence against foreign nationals. A few
days later, violence did in fact erupt in KwaZulu-Natal. Gigaba made
a comment that leaders should behave responsibly, which appeared to
have angered the king.

In the end, the SA Human Rights Commission decided, controversially,
to exonerate Zwelithini. And the ANC, certainly in public, has
failed to publicly criticise the king for these comments. Which
surely suggests they do not believe that there is a link between
what he said and the violence that followed.

It is important to follow this logic through to the bitter end. If
the Zulu king makes comments like this and does not incite violence
against foreign nationals, while the mayor of Joburg makes similar
comments and does incite violence, then who has more power? Is the
ANC seriously suggesting that Herman Mashaba, as a DA mayor, has a
greater moral authority and plain old influence over people in
Tshwane than King Goodwill Zwelithini does in KZN? And if that is
the case, it surely follows then that the ANC is actually in much
greater political trouble than we thought.

In politics, it is usually a mistake to build your enemy up, to make
them look powerful. In their haste to be seen to condemn Mashaba,
that is exactly what the ANC is doing. It made him look powerful, as
if he had the ability to shape events, that he has this magical
authority over people. Who, for the record, weren’t even in “his”
city, but in Pretoria.

But what is also being forgotten here is the other actions of
national government. As the CEO of the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation,
Neeshan Balton, pointed out on Friday, it was national government
that decided to roll out “Operation Fiela”, whose aim was action
against foreign nationals. And it is national government alone that
controls the police. And thus the officers who are famous for
rounding up foreign nationals and stealing cash from them. It’s not
about what you say as a leader, it’s also about what you do. Our
government has failed to do much to change attitudes, to present any
kind of example.

Mashaba himself said, in a statement issued on Monday, that he had
tried to set up several meetings with Gigaba to discuss this entire
issue, and invited him to a city lekgotla on the issue. Mashaba says
he declined that invitation. But it would appear Gigaba is happy to
discuss the issue, just not with Joburg’s DA mayor. Rather,
according to Mashaba, he has accepted an invitation to speak at an
event hosted by the Joburg ANC, and its leader, and former Joburg
mayor Parks Tau.

No matter how you look at it, that is playing politics in times when
the national government should know better.

To look at this situation from a neutral standpoint, should such a
place exist, is to realise that everyone is at fault here. Mashaba
should not have said what he said. The ANC national government has
not provided an example of how to treat foreign nationals, despite
often saying the right words. People of influence who say things
that are xenophobic are let off the hook.

Very few of the people who call themselves leaders in our society
can escape blame here. And if any of them think that they can blame
someone else, it’s time they took a look in the mirror. DM

*****************************************************

AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with a
particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.

AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org