Global Policy Forum

By Absalom Mutere

A merchant in Kahlil Gibran's narrative entitled The Prophet said, speak to us of Buying and Selling. The Prophet answered: "To you the earth yields her fruit and you shall not want if you but know how to fill your hands."It is in exchanging the gifts of the earth that you shall find abundance and be satisfied. Yet unless the exchange be in love and kindly justice, it will but lead some to greed and others to hunger."

The problem in today's reality seems to lie in this exchange which has realised colossal profits for the few while increasing poverty and hunger amongst majorities.

Traditionally, Third World poverty has been attributed to the vagaries of corrupt and inefficient leadership.

It is this leadership that is now being challenged by the international donor community to liberalise, privatise and democratise. The assumption is that things will get better when they comply with the rules of the game.

In trade, however, those rules do not seem to apply. There is a growing protectionist thrust which is hampering the liberalisation of global trade. Double standards are evolving as countries which insist on defining the rules change them to favour their own in trade related matters.

Contrary to the Prophet's thinking in Gibran's book, the exchange of gifts is not being conducted fairly nor is it being carried out in love and kindly justice.

There are bandits out there seemingly bent on collecting the booty and keeping it all to themselves.

Transparency International (TI) identified them using a corruption index which until recently seemed to only focus on Africa much to the chagrin of its leaders.

TI noted that among the methods used to gain an edge in the market were diplomatic, political and financial pressures; commercial pricing mechanisms; tied foreign aid; tied defence/arms deals; favours and gifts for officials and tied scholarships for education and health care.

For Africa, many of these categories have played themselves out for so long and with such consistency that many now accept them as normal.

The TI index suggests otherwise. In doing double take one now has to think about how these very same categories unfairly enable some to unfairly move goal posts on others. Short of saying it directly, the TI yardstick suggests that corruption in the global arena can be defined using the above categories. In this case, using the same, the spotlight turns away from Africa and lands squarely on Western countries and their corporations.

As part of a growing trend towards holding that part of the world equally accountable, it is playing out the vision of its founder, Dr Peter Igan, who worked in the international donor community for may years.

There are others in the donor community who are also speaking out. They include IMF chief Horst Koehler who recently criticised US efforts to erect tariffs which protect its agricultural sector.

He was quoted as saying that all of Africa's best reforms will come to nothing if rich nations do not tear down the trade barriers. Ultimately, he noted, trade barriers made a mockery of efforts aimed at reducing poverty.

Demonstrators, anticipating the forthcoming G-8 summit, are preparing anti-globalisation protests which address the same issues.

It probably won't make a difference knowing that for the first time, five African leaders along with the UN Secretary General have been invited.

The extent to which reform can be realised through an index that highlights corruption, an IMF chief who seems genuinely concerned, and demonstrators rallying behind the cause in full view of the media remains to be seen.

However, with guaranteed resistance, it will be a fight. On the ground the 'compradores' are rallying. The same class of people who benefited by activities labelled corruption on the TI index are either challenging reform or appropriating it in a manner that benefits them.

They evidently have no interest in promoting the concept of a global commons that benefits all.

In Zambia, unnerved by President Mwanawasa's determination to clean up, they are now trying to get rid of him claiming that an alleged mental condition renders him unfit to rule.

They made their millions cashing in on the privatisation of Zambian parastatals. Wining and dining with foreign financiers, they struck lucrative deals.

Mwanawasa's clean-up operation threatens questions the legitimacy of their transactions. It is within his own party, the Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD) that dissenting voices are now being heard.

Not surprisingly, those voices are the same ones that had unlimited access under the Chiluba regime.

In Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo's coming to power gave reform minded constituents hope. The score card following his first term in office did not look good though. It is said Obasanjo is generally a good and well meaning man. Indeed his inability to realise significant change had more to do with resistance emanating from powerful vested interests. Until they were accommodated nothing moved.

The Nigerian scenario replicates itself in Kenya. Resistance in Zimbabwe took on a slightly different dimension come election time. The powers that be resisted by simply playing the racial card. The burning of white farms emphatically underlined their distaste for change.

In both Kenya and Zimbabwe, media laws are being promoted in violation of one of our most fundamental human rights - freedom of expression. Anything goes, it seems, in order to maintain monopoly control. Challenges remain. If Gibran's prophet, using contemporary language, were to write up a shopping list of the six ingredients needed in the mix to approximate his ideal, it would probably include the following, amongst others:

- a production system that is obliged to preserve the ecological base;

- an international system that fosters sustainable patterns of trade; and a self correcting political system.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.