He told congregants
gathered at the Easter Sunday service at Somhlolo Stadium to have faith.
The Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by the King and
described by the Media Institute of Southern Africa in a report on press
freedom in the kingdom as a
‘pure propaganda machine for the royal family’, reported on Tuesday (18 April 2017), ‘He said the worshippers should start believing that
Swaziland is already in the first world status and it will surely come to pass
if they believe it.
‘His Majesty King Mswati
III said it was very imperative for the country to attain first world status so
that the coming generations can enjoy it.’
The King has been talking
about Swaziland becoming a ‘First World’ nation for some years, but has never made it clear what he means by it.
The concept of the ‘First
World’ nation is a little outdated. During the time of the Cold War, following
the Second World War, the ‘First World’ nations were generally considered to be
those that supported the United States, against the Soviet Union and the
‘communist bloc’. In the past 20 years or so, since the ‘fall’ of the Soviet
Union, the term ‘First World’ has begun to fall into disuse.
There are many modern-day
definitions of ‘First World’, but they all insist that to be included in this
category a nation must be a multi-party democracy and people must be able to
elect and dismiss their government.
Swaziland is not like this.
King Mswati III rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch,
political parties are banned from taking part in elections and the King chooses
the Prime Minister and government. There is no way for the people to either
elect or dismiss the King’s government.
‘First World’ status cannot
be achieved without a movement towards democracy. King Mswati has no intention
of allowing this to happen and he continues to keep a firm grip on any public
dissent in his kingdom.
Another ‘definition’ of
‘First World’ speaks to prosperity and the health of the nation’s economy. But,
Swaziland is nowhere close to becoming prosperous.
The United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
in Swaziland issued a report in February 2014 that
received no publicity in the kingdom, that said if Swaziland were to achieve
‘First World’ status it would have to be ‘among
high human development countries like Norway, Australia, United States,
Netherlands and Germany to name a few’.
UNDP went on to give these
statistics comparing present-day Swaziland with Norway, the United States and
Germany.
Life expectancy: Swaziland (48.9 years); Norway (81.3); United States (78.7); Germany
(80.6).
Mean average years of schooling: Swaziland (7.1); Norway (12.6); United States
(13.3); Germany (12.2).
Percentage of population with at least secondary
school education: Swaziland
(48); Norway (95.2); United States (94.5); Germany (96.6).
The UNDP in Swaziland did
not comment on the likelihood of Swaziland reaching ‘First World’ status by
2022; it did not have to. Any independent observer can see from these
statistics that Swaziland is not even close to reaching the King’s target.
The UNDP is not alone. In
2012, a report published by 24/7 Wall St in the United States, and based on data from the World
Bank, identified Swaziland as the fifth poorest country
in the entire world.
It said 69 percent of King
Mswati’s 1.3 million subjects lived in poverty.
Its report stated, ‘[T]he
country’s workforce is largely concentrated in subsistence agriculture, even
though the country faces serious concerns about overgrazing and soil depletion.
While these factors harm the nation’s economy, health concerns are likely one
of the major factors preventing Swaziland’s population from escaping poverty.’
King Mswati does little to
address this situation. His latest call to prayer is another distraction away
from the true dire situation in Swaziland and misleads his subjects about the
prospects of achieving ‘First World’ status.
Richard Rooney
See also
SWAZILAND
FIRST WORLD MYTH
KING, THE FIRST WORLD AND DEMOCRACY
http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2013/12/king-first-world-and-democracy.html
No comments:
Post a Comment