Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Gordhan Pravin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gordhan Pravin. Show all posts

Tuesday, 16 August 2011

SHOULD SWAZILAND BE COLONISED?

Moneyweb, South Africa

16 August 2011

SOURCE

Should Swaziland be “colonised”?

Gordhan is already half-way towards “colonisation.”

By Stanley Uys

Angry over South Africa’s R2.5 bn bailout of Swaziland? Aghast that King Mswati III (Africa’s last remaining absolute monarch, crowned in 1986 and “looting the state coffers” ever since) now will have an even more “lavish and indulgent lifestyle” for himself and his 12 (approximately) wives?

Join the club – the northern Eurozone one. The northerners themselves are furious over bailouts: Greece and Cyprus, maybe Ireland. Who’s next?

Mswati has an estimated personal fortune of $200 million. SA’s Finance minister Pravin Gordhan (furious, too, that Mswati jumped the gun to announce the bailout, minus the conditions attached by Gordhan), will not confirm that Mswati first asked the IMF in vain for R10m.

Mswati’s critics range across the whole Left-to-Right spectrum. Ill-feeling runs high in SA against Mswati, seen as running his landlocked nation as his personal fiefdom for more than two decades. Swaziland’s pro-democracy activists threaten to march on the Union Buildings in Pretoria, and SA’s trade unions threaten to cross the border. How far will either get?

The Democratic Alliance calls on King Mswati to unban all political parties and release opposition party members and civil society activists who have been detained without trial. Who will hearken to it?

Cosatu, scornful of the “very vague conditions” attached by Gordhan to the bailout, says: "This is not a natural disaster, but one made in Lobamba (the country's traditional and legislative capital) by a few royal elites who have milked the country dry from years of extravagance, corruption, parasitism and poor management.”

King Mswati’s unelected administration has run through his country’s central bank reserves to pay public sector wages. The IMF says the crux is a civil service wage bill that consumes 18% of GDP. Mswati’s government owes at least $180m in unpaid bills. Repayments of the bailout will be via debits recovered from Swaziland's share of the Southern African Customs Union duties (60% of the kingdom’s total state revenue).

Gordhan says: “Swaziland is a sovereign country; we can only go so far.” It is in SA’s interests to have a stable country. “It’s not our place to dictate to them.” “Sovereign country” is the mantra most African states chant - afraid that outside interference in one profligate “sovereign” African country will lead to interference in the next? Sovereignty is the bulwark behind which ex-President Thabo Mbeki and the African Union resisted “interference.”

The DA makes the point that more than 90% of Swazi imports come from SA and SA buys about two-thirds of Swazi exports. Put these and other points together and the Mswati regime emerges as “utterly reliant” on SA’s goodwill. SA, says the DA, “should not miss this opportunity to contribute to the democratisation of our neighbour by using our economic leverage…without delay.”

By asking Swaziland to implement only economic, not political, reforms, Gordhan invites political restiveness among impatient SA trade unionists and in tiny Swaziland’s 1.4m population. The ANC Youth League, frustrated over its recent failed move to overthrow the Botswana government, sees Swaziland as a sitting duck.

When Zimbabwe was in its worst mess, did the thought flit through the ANC’s collective mind (it has one?) that Zimbabwe would soon be up for grabs?

The DA calls for “democratisation,” but wouldn’t “colonisation” be an option? A joint endeavour by say the UN or some other internationally-endorsed foreign institution or think-tank? (forget about the African Union).

Let’s get this straight. Colonialism as Africa has known it, is past its sell-by date. In any case, who would want a colony now, especially a run-down one like Swaziland? But what about a benign consortium, with hard-headed assistance in mind, and international backing?

Already, Gordhan wants a team of South African experts with unlimited access to “assist Swaziland with its fiscal and budgetary plans”; Swaziland to undertake "confidence-building measures" to attract foreign direct investment; to align its fiscal policy to International Monetary Fund standards; and to co-operate with "multilateral engagements" to stabilise Swaziland’s tiny economy. Gordhan is already half-way towards “colonisation.”

Hopefully, the critical political reforms Swaziland needs will arrive when they are propelled there by the momentum of economic change. If not, who would administer Swaziland if it went into political rehab? To judge by King Mswati’s record, politically it should be taken into protective custody or placed under a curator bonis. Its own trade unions, encouraged by Cosatu and other SA unions, could lend support, even if under warning not to rock the financial boat.

The problem is this: If the ANC cannot democratise itself, how can it democratise Swaziland?

Thursday, 11 August 2011

LOAN COULD LEAD TO GENUINE CHANGE

Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan today (11 August 2011) Thursday defended a controversial R2.4-billion bail-out for Swaziland and said he hoped it would encourage democratic shifts in Africa's last absolute monarchy, the Mail and Guardian, South Africa reports.

South Africa has come in for criticism over the loan from Swazi activists, who had lobbied Pretoria to withhold the bail-out until Swaziland's King Mswati III agreed to democratic reforms.

"Will this loan encourage genuine change? We hope so," Gordhan told journalists.

"I think it's in the interests of Swaziland that there are changes in that country which are compatible with what the Swazi population want, which allows for free and open political activity and ... respect for the position of his majesty on the one hand and democratic institutions on the other hand.

"But that's for the Swazi people to actually develop for themselves."

The South African government is acting as guarantor to the R2.4-billion loan from the Reserve Bank to the central bank of Swaziland, backed by payments from a regional customs union.

To read the full Mail and Guardian report, click here.


Friday, 5 August 2011

S AFRICA ‘DON'T SUBSIDISE DESPOTS’

New Age, South Africa

5 August 2011

SOURCE

Editorial: Should we help despots?

The New Age Editorial

The government’s R2.4bn bailout of Swaziland is one of those classical conundrums in politics – damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

In announcing the bailout, Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan stressed it was meant to ensure Swaziland improved its governance and moved towards democracy, and that it would not benefit the kingdom’s despotic ruler, King Mswati III. The rescue package is said to be a loan from the South African Reserve Bank to the Swaziland Reserve Bank, implying that it is not a government-to-government agreement. That is cold comfort, given the hold that Mswati has on all institutions in his country.

Not surprisingly, the announcement came under immediate fire from across the political spectrum in both South Africa and Swaziland. The main criticism is that the bailout is likely to strengthen the position of Mswati and weaken pro-democracy forces.

This is not without merit and, if one considers the conditions spelled out by Gordhan, it was taken into account. The question is whether it will be enforced should Mswati renege.

In fairness to the government, these matters are never as easy as they might seem. South Africa is the leading nation in the region and has an obligation to respond in pragmatic ways to potential contagion crises. The collapse of Swaziland would be minuscule in global terms. Certainly, compared to the goings-on in Europe and the United States. But here, on our doorstep, it would have huge ramifications, not only for us, but for the region as a whole. The same goes for a collapse of Zimbabwe, next in the queue for an even bigger bailout.

As the events in Europe and the US demonstrate, the solutions are not straightforward and leaders struggle to make sound and lasting remedial decisions. However, SA resources shouldn’t, in any way, subsidise any despotic rule.

See also

S AFRICA SETS OUT LOAN CONDITIONS

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2011/08/s-africa-sets-out-loan-conditions.html

S AFRICA LOAN CONDITIONS ‘HOT AIR’

Swaziland Solidarity Network

Statement

4 August 2011

SOURCE

South African Government shuts it doors on Swazi Pro-democracy movement.

The Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN) is calling upon the South African government to stop dilly dallying at a time when it has a genuine opportunity to exert pressure on Swazi authorities to stop human rights abuses and end the Tinkhundla dictatorship.

The Swazi people, through their political parties and civic organizations, made it clear that they wanted assurance that any loan granted to Swaziland by the South African government would come attached with strict and clear demands to create a transparent political environment which would make sure that the assistance is not in vain.

The key immediate demands of the Swazi people are:

1. The unconditional unbanning of all political parties.

2. The release of all political prisoners

3. The return of all exiles.

4. The unconditional freedom of all political prisoners.

5. The drafting a democratic constitution.

6. Freedom of expression in all media broadcasting institutions and a complete end to censure.

7. The end of the Tinkhundla royal experiment.

8. The election of a transition government.

The South African government ignored all these demands and instead focused on its own bilateral agreements with the Swazi government. This is fair, as no government will bail out another for free.

The South African government is free to extract as many concessions from its Swazi counterparts as it can. However, it is wrong to trivialise the efforts of Swazis to engage them on the bigger issue of sound governance and democracy. If truth be told, the pro-democracy movement has been ignored by the South African government.

There is nothing tangible that is listed in the conditions of the loan that will lead towards democracy in Swaziland. The conditions are nothing but vague and empty but nice sounding words that tip toe around the issue, mentioning human rights and democracy here and there but in the end giving no concrete plan on the role that the loan agreement will play in encouraging the Swazi government to pave way for those things to become a reality.

Ironically, the statement issued by the Minister of finance is very clear on the repayment of the loan. As long as Swaziland is a member of SACU and continues to contribute to it, there is no way that South Africa cannot get its money back. That is the only thing that is worth telling about the loan agreement. Everything else is just a lot of hot air.

It is extremely disheartening to note that this comes from a government of a democratic country, lead by a political party that was put in power by a democratic process which only became a reality due to the support and sacrifice of virtually the entire world.

When Apartheid ended in South Africa, an elderly statesman was quick to vilify the United States of America for having sided with Apartheid for so long while the rest of the world was opposed to it – a role that the South African government is now playing. On another occasion he went on to give moral support to the Palestinian cause but still said nothing about the oppression in his backyard. In all these years neither he nor his followers have ever given support to the cause for democracy in Swaziland. Their hypocrisy stinks all the way from Gauteng to Mbabane.

Issued by Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN)

See also

SSN TO MARCH FOR LOAN CONDITIONS

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2011/08/ssn-to-march-for-loan-conditions.html

Thursday, 4 August 2011

ZUMA ROASTED OVER SWAZI LOAN

Times, South Africa

4 August 2011

SOURCE

Zuma roasted over Mswati bailout

South Africa is using its R2.4-billion loan to Swaziland to force its ruler, King Mswati III, to introduce political reforms.

Pretoria yesterday agreed to lend the cash-strapped country the money on condition that it:

Co-operate in "multilateral engagements";

Introduce fiscal and related reforms required by the International Monetary Fund, and table its Public Finance Management Bill in parliament by October;

Come up with confidence-building measures; and

Allow Pretoria to assist it in building [economic] capacity.


Mswati turned to the South African government after the African Development Bank and the IMF turned down his pleas for a bail-out. The loan applications were refused on the grounds that Swaziland had failed to implement fiscal reforms specified in the lending conditions.

It remains to be seen whether the cash from South Africa will put pressure on Mswati - Africa's last absolute monarch - to introduce political, social and economic reforms.

Swaziland trade unions and opposition parties have long accused Mswati of leading an extravagant and opulent lifestyle while his people are being ravaged by HIV and many survive on less than a dollar a day.

Announcing the loan in Pretoria yesterday, Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan said Mswati would be expected to promote democracy, human rights and good governance and [build] credible and effective leadership, develop a strong civil society, and respect universal human rights and the rule of law.

Gordhan expressed confidence that the loan would be used for economic and infrastructural development.

Frustration with Mswati's refusal to yield to popular demands for democratic reform reached boiling point in April when trade unions, pro-democracy activists and opposition parties took to the streets in protest against the king's autocratic rule.

Mzamo Sikhondze, treasurer-general of Swaziland's banned People's United Democratic Movement, accused South Africa of again "baby-sitting a dictator".

South African trade unions and political parties said the loan should be granted strictly on the basis that Mswati would unban all political parties and start talks leading to a democratic Swaziland.

Lucky Lukhele, of the Swaziland Solidarity Network, criticised President Jacob Zuma for agreeing to the loan.

"Zuma has decided to behave like a sugar-daddy of the king. South Africa has many service-delivery issues and he must tell us what informed his decision to [lend Mswati] money".

The ANC Youth League said it was "totally opposed" to the loan.

It said the ANC government could not give the Swaziland government a loan because the ruling party's national general council in September expressed concern about the lack of transformation, and of democracy and human rights, in Swaziland.

The DA's spokesman on international relations, Stevens Mokgalapa, said: "We should use our economic power to influence democratic reforms. [The loan] should not be a freebie. We can't be seen to be sustaining the autocratic government of King Mswati."

SA Communist Party central committee member Solly Mapaila said: "The loan must come with very strict commitments towards a constituent assembly, which will work towards a transitional government that will work towards democratic elections."