What is the true price of Rwanda's recovery?(news.bbc.co.uk)
news.bbc.co.uk
What is the true price of Rwanda's recovery?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8593734.stm
2 comments
I cannot agree with you more.
Rule of law and stable government are necessary to create an environment in which the economy can develop and circumstances for the people improve.
Democracy in an ethnically heterogeneous country does not make this easier, not when the ethnicities in question have simmering feuds and vendettas.
That the US became somewhat ethnically diverse after a stable core was established does not change the fact that African countries have a substantially more difficult task ahead of them in trying to establish governmental and legal frameworks in the midst of competing tribalist agendas.
So, if it works for Rwanda, leave well enough alone.
Results are what matter in Africa right now, not whether a country complies 100% with a Western definition of democracy while citizens are starving in droves.
The first human right is the right to life, and at least some form of security. Free speech comes significantly later.
Democracies in the West work (somewhat) because of shared values established over centuries. Policies of one particular political party compared to another are differences in degree, the parties do not question the underlying foundations of the nation, and one party getting voted into power is hardly the beginning of a purge or dictatorship.
You cannot expect a full-fledged, functioning democracy to grow overnight when not a decade ago people were being killed in their thousands.
Rule of law and stable government are necessary to create an environment in which the economy can develop and circumstances for the people improve.
Democracy in an ethnically heterogeneous country does not make this easier, not when the ethnicities in question have simmering feuds and vendettas.
That the US became somewhat ethnically diverse after a stable core was established does not change the fact that African countries have a substantially more difficult task ahead of them in trying to establish governmental and legal frameworks in the midst of competing tribalist agendas.
So, if it works for Rwanda, leave well enough alone.
Results are what matter in Africa right now, not whether a country complies 100% with a Western definition of democracy while citizens are starving in droves.
The first human right is the right to life, and at least some form of security. Free speech comes significantly later.
Democracies in the West work (somewhat) because of shared values established over centuries. Policies of one particular political party compared to another are differences in degree, the parties do not question the underlying foundations of the nation, and one party getting voted into power is hardly the beginning of a purge or dictatorship.
You cannot expect a full-fledged, functioning democracy to grow overnight when not a decade ago people were being killed in their thousands.
Interestingly, I just met a well-educated Rwandan expat yesterday evening. Expat out of necessity as much or more so than choice. He's sure that if he returned, he would be killed.
I don't have other sources to back this up, but he described the continuing situation of very large numbers of refugees living, often "in the forests", in neighboring countries. As the violence subsided, other populations from neighboring countries flowed in to take advantage of the resulting vacancy, and they now control the government. There is a strong Western (e.g. U.S.) presence, but in his opinion it is there for the purpose of facilitating resource extraction from neighboring countries, e.g. the Congo.
I hope to learn more about this; I'm merely repeating here what was said. He may have his own biases, but I know him through friends whom I know pretty well and trust, and what he said leaves me with the impression that Western news sources are providing much less than the full story.
I don't have other sources to back this up, but he described the continuing situation of very large numbers of refugees living, often "in the forests", in neighboring countries. As the violence subsided, other populations from neighboring countries flowed in to take advantage of the resulting vacancy, and they now control the government. There is a strong Western (e.g. U.S.) presence, but in his opinion it is there for the purpose of facilitating resource extraction from neighboring countries, e.g. the Congo.
I hope to learn more about this; I'm merely repeating here what was said. He may have his own biases, but I know him through friends whom I know pretty well and trust, and what he said leaves me with the impression that Western news sources are providing much less than the full story.
Chicago Public Radio (WBEZ et al.) has a daily hour-long world news show, "Worldview". It specialized in interviewing experts and specialists on topics both big and small. The listener receives MUCH more information, both in detail and in expertise, than is available through much of the (U.S.) mainstream media.
Today, the second "half" (more or less) of the show discussed the situation in Rwanda. Much of the information appears to be similar to what I heard the other month and described in my parent comment, above.
Worldview archive page for the program:
http://www.wbez.org/Program_WV.aspx?episode=41595
Worldview page for the particular segment:
http://www.wbez.org/Program_WV_Segment.aspx?segmentID=41596
Worldview podcast page (note that MP3's that have fallen off the podcast listing due to age are still available through the site's archive pages)
http://podcasts.chicagopublicradio.org/cprworldviewpodcast
I wasn't monitoring the clock exactly, but I think the segment will begin somewhere between minutes 20 and 25 of the podcast (probably around minute 23). If the podcast includes the lead in BBC news summary, add 6 or 7 minutes to my guestimate start time for the segment.
Today, the second "half" (more or less) of the show discussed the situation in Rwanda. Much of the information appears to be similar to what I heard the other month and described in my parent comment, above.
Worldview archive page for the program:
http://www.wbez.org/Program_WV.aspx?episode=41595
Worldview page for the particular segment:
http://www.wbez.org/Program_WV_Segment.aspx?segmentID=41596
Worldview podcast page (note that MP3's that have fallen off the podcast listing due to age are still available through the site's archive pages)
http://podcasts.chicagopublicradio.org/cprworldviewpodcast
I wasn't monitoring the clock exactly, but I think the segment will begin somewhere between minutes 20 and 25 of the podcast (probably around minute 23). If the podcast includes the lead in BBC news summary, add 6 or 7 minutes to my guestimate start time for the segment.
The West and this documentary makes the erroneous assumption that full democracy and unfettered freedom of speech are axiomatic components of a society. Not so. I see these as goals to aspire to, not starting points.
Singapore's rise from one of the poorest countries in Asia to now being wealthier than Britain on a per capita basis was not founded in full democracy. Even Europe had to go through a long evolution from the autocratic Roman Empire, to monarchies, to feudalism, aristocracies, and eventually democracy trickled in.
If what Kagame is doing is working, then let it work for his people, The country is now peaceful and has an inviting and reponsible environment for private enterprise to play a role in developing the country. The west needs to stop trying to fit square pegs into round holes.