By Aaron Sikombe.Aid is money, food, medical care etc, which is given to help countries in difficult situations (Oxford 2011). There are three main forms of aid, economic, humanitarian, and emergency aid. The Time Magazine (2010) says aid money contributes up to 40 per cent of most African countries national budgets; it also goes on to say that African has received over 500 billion dollars in economic aid, in the past 50 years. Africa is not the only region that has been on aid yet as others rise from this malignant vice Africa’s dependence on aid keeps getting stronger. The Marshall Plan for example was the European Recovery Program ( ERP) the primary plan of the United States for rebuilding and creating a stronger foundation for the allied countries of Europe after World War II. The Marshall Plan offered the same aid to European countries; the plan was in operation for four years beginning in July 1947. During that period 13 billion US dollars in economic and technical assistance were given to help the recovery of the European countries that had joined in the Organization for European Economic Co-operation. By the time the plan had come to completion, the economy of every participant nation had grown well past pre-war levels. Yet as African leaders increase the dependency on aid, I strongly believe that aid is doing more harm than good to the African continent, in so many ways. In this article I look at both the pros and cons of aid and leave you the reader to make a conclusion based on the information provided.
First of all foreign aid provides a direct solution to any crisis that may arise. The Somali crisis is just but one in a lot of other cases where Africans have failed to contain a crisis and aid givers step in to save lives of millions at the verge of death. The cries of the 13 million Somali’s for food was only responded to by aid agencies that came to their rescue. In most cases African government cannot contain such crises, mostly due to limited recourses or just poor management.
On the other hand, aid does not provide long term solutions; for instance, the famine in Somali has did not hit the region for the first time. It has been reoccurring, yet instead of providing a long lasting solution, aid agencies come in only when people start starving to death. Aid also suppresses most of the local industries in Africa, which in a way weakens African economies. In 2010 the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation distributed free mosquito nets in some African countries, as good as this may sound, the mosquito nets came at a price to our economies. Due to the fact that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation did not purchase the mosquito nets from local manufactures, hence the local mosquito net factories in Africa did not benefit from this. What this then creates is a vicious cycle of dependence on aid, once the mosquito nets ware out people will sit and wait for another donor.
Supporters of aid however claim that aid helps to promote good governance, as most African leaders are loyal to the donor community that provide them with the money that helps them run their countries. Yet, most of the aid comes with a lot of conditions which include how it is to be spent and if aid agencies sight any infringement in human rights they cut the flow of aid to that particular nation. This was the case in Zimbabwe when the political leaders disregarded the rights of the citizens, aid agencies quickly pulled out.
I also feel that aid can encourage misguided polices at national level. Due to dependency on aid governments make polices that are not based on economic development. (The BBC 2006) reports that in Ethiopia famers are not allowed to own land to farm on and possibly alleviate the food shortages it that area. Instead of introducing reforms the government continues to appeal for aid, when they can bring about a long lasting solution.
The African Union, an organization of African nations, estimated that corruption was costing the continent $150 billion a year, as international donors were apparently turning a blind eye to the simple fact that aid money was carelessly used, (Moyo 2010). It is clear that most of the aid money just ends up in the pockets of greedy leaders. If most of the aid ends up in the hands of corrupt leaders then is clear that the current aid model is not working.
Looking on the bright side, aid organisations bring expatriates into African countries, who in turn pass on their knowledge and skills to Africans. When aid organisations deliver aid in any form they come with expert in that particular filed to help them access the problem. As they leave, they pass down the expertise to the locals so that they can provide solutions when similar problems arise.
However, aid organisations paint a negative picture of Africa to the world and because of this negative publicity people think of Africa as a place filled with starving children, poverty stricken people, where AIDS is just as common as the average flu. Due to the negative publicity investors tend to shy away from investing their money in a continent that is depicted in such a way. The other cause of concern is the fraudulent use of funds by bogus organisations collecting money in the name of helping Africa.
In conclusion, the current aid model for Africa has failed on its face as most of the goals set have not been achieved. Aid has for a long time now been a life line for many African nations. However, even as African leaders put aid first; it is doing more harm than good to the continent of Africa in numerous ways. ]]>
Ofodile (2008) refers to the Africa-China trade as the third scramble for Africa, while Muekali (2004) calls it a ‘strategic partnership.’ Whatever the name one thing is for sure the Africa-China trade is on the rise and is showing no signs of slowing down (Time Magazine, 2011). The Arica-China trade is no new thing, as it dates decades back when the first few African countries were being birthed from colonialism. The first trade agreement with China involved two African countries Zambia and Tanzania. The trade agreement was prompted by Zambia’s need to gain access to an international sea port to transport its imports and exports. Following this, the Zambia government made an agreement with the Tanzanian government to jointly build a railway line from the Indian Ocean port of Dar es salam in Tanzania to the mining town of Kapiri in Zambia (Ofodile, 2008). The Chinese government saw this as an opportunity to win votes from the two Nations to bar USSR from attending the Asia-Africa summit, and so, they offered to foot the cost of the rail project with a condition that China be allowed free trade with the two countries. According to Muekali (2004) this trade deal signed in 1970 was the first sitting of Chinese involvement in Africa. The unregulated nature of the trade has prompted a lot of abuse, which can only be curbed by firm regulations.
Although most people are in favour of the current practice of unregulated trade between Africa and China, it is best to control trade due to the abuse in the existing situation. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to outline the effects of this trade on the African continent.
To start with, Chinese companies have taken advantage of the free trade and the soft foreign investment policies set up by African governments, to set up operations in various industries which including mining, agriculture, construction and textile. As good as it may sound this investment is more of a bane than a solution to Africa’s high unemployment rate, which the African Union (2010) points to be at 75 per cent. Chinese investors have little or no regard for the health of their African workers putting the health of African workers at risk. The mining industry is an industry that requires high levels of protection for workers as they work in hazardous conditions yet Chinese mine owners provide little or no protection for these workers. For instance, the abuse in Zambia’s mamba coal mine which could have been avoided if regulations were in place. It was sad to note that African workers have to work for two years before being given safety helmets (BBC,2011). African workers are constantly exposed to hazardous environments yet their employers do not provide them with medical insurance.
In additions, Chinese employers have taken advantage of the poorly enforced labour laws Africa by paying workers less than the stipulated minimum wage. In a South African town of New Castle Chinese run textile factories pay workers $200 monthly, which is much less than the stipulated minimum wage in South Africa (The Economist, 2011). It further reports that workers in these factories say it’s better to be poorly paid than have no job. Workers have no rights at all when they work for Chinese owned firms. Take Sinazongwe mine in Zambia for instance, when workers collectively decided to protest against poor working conditions, their Chinese employers picked up shotguns and fired directly at the workers who were peacefully asking for their rights (Laing,2010). Such inhuman treatment falls short of the dream that African had when the Chinese first arrived in Africa.
Next, the coming of Chinese firms to Africa to set up operations seemed like a step that will help to provide jobs to jobless Africans. However that has turned out to be a white elephant as the Chinese firms employee only a few African workers, even for unskilled jobs. To add salt to the wound Chinese firms have been reported to bring prisoners from the main land to work in Africa. This was brought to light by the now Zambian president in 2009 when he was running for presidency, he said ‘if 100 Chinese come, 20 of them are skilled and the other 80 are unskilled prisoners.’ This has since brought outrage among the unemployed in Zambia who feel short changed by the new investors (Lombe and Chilemba, 2009)
However, just like his predecessors, after being elected into office Mr Sata changed his stance that was strongly against Chinese investment in Africa (Zambian Watchdog,2012). Which leaves the poor African worker with no other avenue for change, and it’s not like they ask for too much all they asked for was for the government to standby it promise to regulate the trade between Africa and China to easy the abuse that is being brought about by deregulation.
Nigeria, which according to Affic news (2010) is the second largest trading partner in African second only to South Africa. However analysts say that China benefits more form this partnership and it is easy to see why this is the case Muekali (2004) says that China made over 20 billion dollars from its trade with Africa whereas Africa only got 8 billion dollars. Which is highly unfair for Africa, hence the need for regulations to curb such injustice. China has flooded not only the Nigerian market but the entire African continent with its substandard goods. The main concern that comes with these substandard goods is the absence of quality control by most African governments. Nyoni, a Zimbabwean, writes in the New Nationalist (2011), that the government in Zimbabwe and other African governments have failed to protect their people from unhealthy substandard goods from China. He further claims that, the Chinese do not entirely make substandard goods for other markets but they bring substandard goods to African. This practice is a blatant infringement of the rights of African consumers.
Furthermore, with the lack of proper quality control in Africa one only wonders what the Chinese putting in consumer products shipped to Africa. If the Chinese are able to ship contaminated baby milk powder to countries that have strict quality control measures without regard it is not hard to imagine that Africans have been subjected to even worse products. Norfolk (2011) reports that in 2010 the South African government discovered that Mattel toys made China were laced with lead. The safety of Africans from these unscrupulous business men lies in the hands of African leaders to regulate this deep form of abuse on their people.
It is a well-known fact that the majority of Africans live below the poverty line and it is sickening to note how the Chinese are taking advantage of these poor people by selling products that are not durable at a cheap price to the poor Africans. Poor Africans prefer to buy Chinese products because they are cheap despite the products being of poor quality (Magu, 2011). This in a way is one of the worst kinds of exploitations and it clearly shows the lack of morals and business ethics by the Chinese, who take money from poor Africans in exchange for goods that will not last as they have many defects Nyoni (2011) says that most Chinese products are sold with no warrant or guarantee, once bought consumers are not even allowed to exchange the product if any defects are noticed later.
Moving on, the other weakness in the Africa-China trade is the competitive political advantage that China has in world politics. This has given China the political muscle to trade with any African regime regardless of its international standing. China has misused this political power by trading with regimes that have international trade sanctions. For instance in 2006 when the Zimbabwean government was placed under trade sanctions by The UN and EU (Brookes and Shin, 2006). China violated the conditions attached to the sanctions by selling fighter aircrafts and military vehicles to Zimbabwe. In addition China gave the Zimbabwean government a military radio jamming device, which the Zimbabwean government used to block broadcasts of the human rights violations that were going on. This is clear that China provided the human rights violating regime of Robert Mugabe a life line from UN sanctions.
China’s support for regimes that violate human rights does not end with Zimbabwe; it is wide spread across most battle fields on the African continent. Sudan and Chard are just two of the numerous examples of China supplying weapons to human rights violators. In Sudan the BBC (2011) reports that China supplied weapons worth millions of dollars to gain access to the oil rich region of Dafoe, despite the fact that the regime’s leader was wanted by the international court of justice for crime against humanity.
They who support the free trade between Africa and China argue that, Africa’s economy has improved drastically due to Chinas high demand for natural resources and the massive investment that has followed. Africa’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been on the rise due to the height Chinese trade (Carmody and Owusu, 2007) report that African economies had double digit growth even through the financial crisis trading with China which helped maintain the demand for the much needed natural resources. This is one of the signs that the trade with China yields positive benefits.
China has contributed greatly in the development of Africa, Time Magazine (2011) argues that Africa has not had any trading partner that has contributed to its development in the way that China has. This development is evident across most African countries where the sight of constructions sits with an army of Chinese workers is a common thing. The Chinese have in the resent few years constructed over 30,000 km of roads in Africa (The Economist, 2011). The Economist (2011) further states that the Chinese have not only stopped at building roads they have also helped Africa with the construction of over 30 hospitals across Africa to help African governments provide the much needed health car. Going through different African countries and one would be amazed at the works of the Chinese, from roads, hospitals and schools to sports stadia, the works of the Chinese across Africa is undeniable that of good will.
Supporters of the free trade further state that China has given in the past 10 years provided African governments with over $3 billion dollars in loans and grants (Wang, 2007). The loans given to African governments by China are not the same as IMF or World Bank loans, which are tied with a lot of conditions (Independent, 2008). This is clear that China has the best interest of the African people due to the fact that they offer a solution without wasting time asking struggling governments to meet certain conditions. These soft loans also help African governments plan better as they spend the money where it is needed most and not where the condition giving organisations want it to be spent.
In contrast, yes Africa’s GDP has increased but the benefits of this gain are only felt by the few Africans who are in high office. Moyo (2010) claims that the soft loans from China trade provide benefits only to the corrupt leaders that are in African governments. It is for this reason that organisations like the IMF and the World Bank give conditions to loans that they give out, because looking the rate of corruption in African it is only prudent to provide checks and balances after issuing loans that are intended to help Africans and not the leaders. The African Union, an organization of African nations, estimates that corruption is costing the continent $150 billion a year, as international donors were apparently turning a blind eye to the simple fact that aid money was carelessly used (Moyo, 2010).
Next, Infrastructure that is built by the Chinese in Africa is intended to soften African governments to allow the Chinese favours. As pointed out earlier the Chinese are prone to breaking labour laws hence the need for them to do favour for Africa governments to close one eye when they break laws. This come at a high cost to the ordinary African who does not benefit from the trade but is forced to face the inhuman treatment
In addition, the Chinese government has supported government with military equipment to fight off opposition. Mwanawina (2007) reports that the Chinese government provided weapons to the regime of Omar Al Bashir, a man wanted by the International Court Justice for crimes against humanity. Al Bashir who was at war with his own people from the southern part of his country aimed at oppressing oppositions against his reign.
All in all, the trade between Africa and China has a history that stretches back to the early post-colonial days. It is also clear that the pioneers of the trade are two neighbouring countries Zambia and Tanzania, which still remain at the epicentre of the trade. However, it has been sited that Chinese presence in Africa is a curse due to the following factors: Chinese investors do not adhere to the local labour laws, putting African workers health at risk, by exposing them to hazardous working environments with barely any protection. It has also been noted that African workers are exploited by their Chinese employers, who make them work for long hours and do not compensate them for the extra hours. Next, Chinese companies have been viewed to displace labour by employing only a few locals workers but more of their own nationals, who have been sited to be prisoners from main land China. Onwards, it is clear that the Chinese are dumping substandard goods in Africa taking advantage of the absence of proper quality control in Africa. These products have also raised health concerns among Africans. In this vain it has been established that the Chinese have taken advantage of the low income African community by selling them products that are of low durability. Moving on, China uses its strong political advantage to trade with embattled regimes and sanctioned governments, offering them with military and financial support.
The trade between China and Africa is highly beneficial to both parties; however free trade without regulations would lead to deserter in the long run. After all that has been sighted it is strongly recommended that African governments set regulations to guide the China-Africa trade in order to yield great benefits for both parties.
State your Position ! Sata
It is also surprising to note that the ever outspoken Catholic Bishops have remained mute over this issue and many Zambians wonder whether they are in ‘indirect’ support of this ambiguous state.
One wonders where and how the same people advocating for gay rights were born. In case they didn’t know, they were born because a man and woman married.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon was here in Zambia and at no time did we see him with a male partner, He came with his wife. Many Zambians wonder why Ban Ki Moon is advocating for gay rights and yet where he comes from in his country there is no such nuisance.
I conquer with what comrade Mugabe said about the west and there gay rights and i quote “Nature is nature. It has created male and female,” Mugabe told thousands of supporters at his 88th birthday celebration at a stadium in the eastern border town of Mutare.
“You David Cameron, are you suggesting that you don’t know that or is it some kind of insanity or part of the culture of Europeans.
“In their newspapers, that’s one of my sins. That I called (gays) worse than pigs and dogs because pigs know there are males and females. It’s even in the Bible that you create through the system of marrying.
“That’s how we were born, so we reject that outright and say to hell with you. I won’t even call him a dog because my own dog will complain and say, but what have I done.”
“Please, young men and women, you don’t have the freedom for men to marry men and women to marry women. You have the freedom for men to marry women. That’s God’s freedom. That’s what created you and me.”It seems Mugabe speaks sense on this one and one wonders why our very own outspoken Sata has decided to remain mute.
Mugabe has for decades ranted against homosexuality.
Today comrade Mugabe seems to be the only African leader who seem to have stood his ground and a lot of us well meaning Zambians and others will surely embrace him. Yes Mugabe might be stubborn but his stubbornness on gay rights is something worth admiring unlike our leaders who are mute!.
As much as Zambians agree that sexual orientation is not a choice but a complex interplay of both biological and environmental factors, homosexuality is both unnatural and dysfunctional. It is a good example of an abnormal variation in human sexuality. Legalizing homosexuality is a sign of a not being well-meaning and not wanting to uphold that which we hold sacred.
The Zambian people demand to know your position as government, the Zambian people demand to know your position as Catholic Bishops.
The PF government and Catholic Bishops should state their position now. Their quietness is an indication that all is well with them !
Edwin Zimba ]]>
The Need for Radical economic Reforms for Zambia
By Choolwe Muzyamba
Zambia, a country blessed with abundant natural resources and arable land, plenty of water bodies and favorable climatic conditions yet its population is still entangled in a vicious circle of unimaginable suffering. Poverty in Zambia is still a huge challenge; most of the population is still struggling to live a decent life. With the soaring food prices, housing, electricity and water bills. One wonders what the significance of the much talked about economic growth is,which is estimated at 7%GDP for the year 2011, making Zambia one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
Zambia’s Rosy Economic Indicators
Zambia’s GDP in 2010 was 6.6% indicating a growth in GDP from 6.4% in 2009. Agriculture, tourism, construction, manufacturing and mining are driving growth which is expected to expand by 6.5% and 6.7% in 2011 and 2012 respectively.
Overall, primary industries performed well in 2010 with agriculture growing by 7.6%. In 2011 and 2012 agriculture growth is projected at 3.2% and 4.6%, respectively. The largest contribution to 2010 growth came from maize production. The harvest reached 2.8 million tonnes compared to 1.9 million tonnes in the previous season. Zambia is Africa’s biggest copper producer and the mining sector’s big recovery was due to improved global copper prices. The sector is estimated to have grown by 7.4% in 2010.
Manufacturing, which historically has contributed about 10% of GDP, grew by 2.5% in 2010. The government has made substantial progress in infrastructure construction and has invested in manufacturing through the establishment of Multi Facility Economic Zones. Tourism, which was hard hit by the financial crisis, is expected to rebound strongly with estimated growth of 25% in 2010. Construction was expected to expand by 10% in 2010 and maintain double-digit growth in the next few years.
Monetary policy focused on sustaining stability by maintaining single digit inflation while ensuring adequate liquidity for the growing economy. Annual inflation declined to an estimated 7.9% at the end of 2010, down from 9.9% in December 2009. Annual food inflation declined sharply from 8.0% in December 2009 to 2.8% in September 2010.
THE REAL PICTURE ON THE GROUND
The analysis by FSRP shows that the number of poor rural households in Zambia went up by about 1%, from 88.7% to 89.6%. The authors conclude that, “the results indicate the challenges that Zambia faces in her poverty reduction quest recording very minimal poverty reduction over the seven years period”.
Income inequality also remains very high in Zambia. Levels of inequality remain very high, with the Gini coefficient, having increased from 0.64 in 2001 and 2004 to 0.67 in 2008. The conclusion is inescapable,
The gains from general economic growth in the country are not helping close the inequality gap. If these findings are corroborated by other studies then they have very important policy implications. The question remains, what kind of investments are required to close the inequality gap and raise the majority of rural Zambians out of poverty.
Zambia’s Cosmetic Mining Sector
All the mines in Zambia are in foreign hands, yet 80% of Zambia’s revenue comes from the mining industry. So in short, Zambia’s economy is largely run and controlled by foreigners. Towns housing the mines are in ruins, infrastructure is in a dilapidated state and the local people are living in abject poverty yet on a daily basis their land produces millions of dollars.
Zambia has, till now, shied away from benefit sharing. This has resulted in the country’s richest regions (Copper belt, Solwezi, Sinazongwe, Maambaect) – holding most of its minerals – becoming the homes to extremely poor people. Mining in Zambia has, contrary to claims, done little for the development of the mineral-bearing regions of the country. This has led to this disturbing situation am calling rich lands, poor land owners!
WAYFOWARD
1) We need to fight the foreignization of Zambia’s economy. We need a mining policy which aims to strike a balance between making the best use of the economic benefits for the country and Zambian citizens, while allowing investors to earn competitive returns.
2) Mining industry should be run by a partnership of Government, Local Investors and Foreign Investors
3) A law should be passed to force Mining companies to not only rehabilitate existing infrastructure but also construct new roads, schools and hospitals. If a tiny country like Guinea can have a Mining Act dictates that owners of private land will receive 20 per cent of the total royalty paid for mining leases on the land. Why can’t we do the same? South Africa’s Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act includes provisions that give local communities powers to benefit substantially from mining projects. And Peru follows a system of royalty tax, payable to the Central government, which is then distributed among local administrations and communities. Surely, towns housing mines should be seen to benefit.
4) There is need to renegotiate the current tax regime and have one which is more inclined to benefiting Zambians as opposed to one which shows our fear of losing foreign investors.
5) Government should have a substantial hand in the running of the economy (We need to do away with the notion of “government having no business in business”)
6) The government should start subsidizing the production of goods produced by locals and not subsidize consumption
7) The government should only borrow to invest in infrastructure that will build the productive capacity of Zambia e.g. Borrow to build a factory to finish copper into cathodes, ammunition and wires etc. (not where they borrow to consume)
“Generally there is need to understand that unless the country can evolve an inclusive growth model, there will be no development at all.”
]]>
By Godfrey ChikumbiTAKING a mere and quick glance at group A of the 2012 Equatorial Guinea/Gabon, one hastens to conclude that there is no better group for Zambia than this one. Yes, on paper the group A looks the easiest of the four at the AFCON. This is however a totally tricky group the Chipolopolo finds itself
in. Zambia’s opponents are Equatorial Guinea, Libya and Senegal.
Firstly, one needs to tentatively agree that Zambia is going into this Africa Cup as one of the best teams based on the 2010 Angola AFCON performance. The Chipolopolo stormed the quarterfinals for the first
time in 14 years. We would have been talking about making to the last four had it not been for Thomas Nyirenda’s failure to score from the spot.
I would like to point out that the current Chipolopolo squad is the best we have ever after the one that made it to the grand finale of the 1994 AFCON under the tutelage of Danish Roald Poulsen. It has a
been a cry of most Zambian soccer fans to see a side that finds the back of the net.
You will agree with me that the 1994 AFCON squad disappeared faster than it came although they struggled to reach the1996 AFCON quarter finals in South Africa. That was the last creame de creame of the Zambian team soccer fans had a taste of.
Coming back to the current squad; it has been every soccer fans’ wish for Chipolopolo to start scoring goals. This is what the squad has started doing. Zambia scored more goals than in the 2012 AFCON
qualifying series than it did in the 2010 joint World Cup and Africa Cup qualifiers.
Jacob Mulenga ( FC Utrecht, Netherlands), Emmanuel Mayuka ( Young Boys, Switzerland), James Chamanga ( Dalian Shide, China) and Collins Mbesuma ( Golden Arrows, TP Mazembe). These are the soldiers Zambia will be looking up to for goals and glory in Equatorial Guinea. I know there are other boys you would like me to mention but the quartet is currently on form.
However, my interest today is not in a player by player analysis. I want to take a quick look at Zambia’s chances against her opponents. Let me begin with Zambia’s perennial rivals; Senegal. Nicknamed Les
Lions De la Taranga (meaning the Lions of Teranga), Senegal has proved to be a thorn in Zambia’s fresh.
The Senegalese who are currently ranked 42nd on the FIFA men’s rankings, will be making their 13th appearance at the AFCON after they failed to qualify in2010 but were present at the 2008 GHANA Africa cup is arguably the best side in this group. The Lions of Teranga have had an upper hand over the Chipolopolo in terms of head to head performance. Senegal will take on Zambia with a better side.
Most of the Senegalese players are plying their trade in some of the best leagues in the world including the Spanish la Liga, English Premier League and the French league one. The likes of in form Demba Ba ( Newcastle United) and Moussa Sow ( Lille) to name but a few; are expected to cause problems to our squad. The Teranga Lions have consolidated their technical bench by drafting former defender Ferdinand Colly into it. Do you remember Colly? That dreadlocked dude who put up a solid defence when we last lost to them at Konkola Stadium.
The Senegalese know that their first game will be against a Zambian side that has always proved to be a problem to them. The former 2002 World Cup quarterfinalists will put up a fierce fight against Zambia.
Herve Renard has never faced this rejuvenated Senegalese side except the CHAN team that the Chipolopolo locked horns with in Ivory Coast.
Therefore, the Chipolopolo manager will have to be cautious of Senegal. There is everything to play for against Senegal. Renard needs to do a lot of homework. I salute the Football Association of Zambia
(FAZ) for arranging to play a west African side in Nigeria in a FIFA friendly on November 12. This is a step in the right direction.
FAZ is also considering a training camp in Spain; this will even make our team even more confident to go into this competition. You reap what you sow, so goes this popular saying. When FAZ does not adequately prepare the team, we have always seen shambolic performances put up at such competitions.
What about Libya? Most soccer fans have urged Renard to be wary of the Mediterranean Knights. They are capable of thwarting our dreams to storm the grand finale. Firstly, there is always a belief that Zambia
does not perform well against North African opposition. This is very true. But do we have to continue to believe in this? We have learnt enough lessons at the feet of our Arabic opponents and enough is
enough. I don’t think coming from a war Libya will be more organized than us.
A quick view of the Mediterranean knights will show you that they are ranked better than Zambia. We currently are 81st in the world while Libya commands the 65th place. These paper rankings in most cases are not replicated during 90 minutes field work, it is just important to be cautious of this as it helps a side prepare adequately.
The Libyans will be making their 3rd appearance at this particular AFCON. This however does not make them an underdog to Zambia who will be making a record 15th appearance. Isn’t this nice? You will note that this side is dominated by local players who are plying their trade in the domestic league with just a few like Diamal Mahamat who is playing for Sporting Braga in Portugal. This is typical of most North African sides. Look at Egypt and Morocco.
Zambia know that they will be facing one of their long time ‘friends’. A friendly game or two against any North Africa side such as Egypt or Tunisia can do. This will give a lot of impetus to the team before taking on the Libyans. The Libyans will be playing at this AFCON in a cerebration mood after hounding out their late President Muammar Qaddaffi from the hot seat. You will agree with me that the Mediterranean knights have since changed their uniforms whose colors depict the National Transitional Council (NTC) government.
And finally, the Nzalang Nacional of Equatorial Guinea. The Equatoguineans may not have qualified to the AFCON before but they are capable of stopping us from progressing if will underrate them.
Equatorial Guinea will be co –hosting Africa’s biggest soccer showpiece with Gabon. This will give them enough confidence to take on any side backed by the soccer mad home fans in Bata.
Ranked 155th on earth the Nzalang Nacional will be playing with their heads up having shown the world that there is football in that part of Africa through the women national team.
Remember they have Junjo Muko who plays for Athletico Madrid and Bodipo of Deportivo La Coruna both of Spain. The two forwards have for long had a good taste of Spanish football. The duo who are certainly part of this squad can cause upsets for Zambia. There is therefore need to be careful with this little known Equatoguinean side. We have a good coach; yes a good coach. Renard knows this side better than any other foreign coach we should have thought of bringing in.
The current squad was last assembled by Renard just before he left for Angola. I know people will not agree with me on this one, but I candidly say that embattled Dario Bonetti was using Renard’s players.
Let the Fox name the team now. Renard must make sure that he does not leave our in form players. We are watching him and are interested in his dealings. We won’t hesitate to call for his blood if he misfires.
We are expecting to see Clifford Mulenga, Given Singuluma, Kennedy Mudenda, Hichani Himoonde, Justin Zulu, Rodger Kola, Sebastian Mwansa and company.
I also join cries by many soccer fans to ask one Renard to call Sudanese league top scorer Jonas Sakuwaha. The player is hot and banging in goals week in week out. You can’t leave such a player.
Listen to people if you are to succeed.
Finally, let me just wish our Chipolopolo squad all the best. Well back home the Fox, Mr. Herve Renard.
Hakainde Hichilema
This is a Careful Analysis of 2001 – 2011 Election Results and a letter sent to HH on 25th October 2011. By Maurice Makalu.
———————————————————————————————————————————————
Re: MR. HH, PLEASE STOP YOUR TRIBALISM.
The above matter refers.
The Post newspaper has in the recent past featured editorials condemning your “tribalistic and dangerous anti-Bemba politics.”
The Zambian Inquirer asked Mr. Cornelius Mweetwa, Deputy Spokesperson of UPND and Choma Constituency MP, to comment on these allegations.
Here is what he said, “The (tribalism) attacks (from The Post) are unfair as the regional support given to the UPND is not different from that received by other parties including the Patriotic Front (PF).” He continued that, “A careful analysis of election results has revealed that the major political parties have attracted a home vote associated with a leader of the party. Further since 2001, UPND has received least votes in Northern, Luapula; while Sata has received support from the regions associated with his tribe.”
I want to give you that ‘careful analysis of elections results.’ Because clearly, if Mr. Mweetwa has ever done any careful analysis, he cannot tell such lies in the media; unless if he just wants to deceive you and the Zambian people. Or perhaps he is acting under your instructions, which I believe not, to defend your tribalism even if it means lying to the Zambian people.
According to the careful analysis, Mr. HH, the facts are:
- The regional support given to the UPND is VERY DIFFERENT from that received by other parties from the region of their presidents.
- The support Sata has received from regions associated with his tribe is not abnormal such that you should compare and use it to defend your tribalism.
- Further from 2001, UPND has received least votes not just from Northern and Luapula, as if Bembas were tribalistic, but from other regions as well: Livingstone Constituency, Copperbelt, Lusaka and Eastern provinces. You have grown by just over 1% in Western, North western and Central combined.
- Your party has received 99% growing support only from areas with growing anti-Bemba sentiments. Is that a coincidence?
Let us begin the ‘careful analysis’ that proves the above facts. THE LINK TO THE FULL DOCUMENT:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ic80sjUTmPPDGvST_2IacwjXergOMLnGWFeZBCr325U/edit