the New York Times Editorial posted an editorial focusing on Africa. i think that it is interesting to see that they have made an explicit effort to highlight something positive in Africa, which is most welcome and is what most of us have been asking for. i am not ghanaian and would love to know what the perspective of people from ghana is about this article and it's main point.

as i have stated in previous postings, i am a skeptic about the interests of western media when it comes to africa. i do appreciate positive coverage, but also understand that is promotes a certain worldview [as does the negative coverage]. i want to get more informed about the happenings in ghana to understand this relationship. incidentally, Ghana seems to be the darling of many western media outlets now that are looking for positive stories from africa... and i guess that says something about the country. have a look also at this story: Talk is Profitable in Ghana

My one point is that both stories seem to point out economic issues as the 'good news' and the potential for foreign investment at some level... back to the issue of self interest. not necessarily a bad thing... just good to be aware of it!

thoughts...?


*************************************************************************************

April 25, 2005

A Fragile Success in Africa


Teetering on the verge of success, but with failure always threatening to knock at the door, Ghana has lately taken up the mantle of what passes for a success story in Africa. It is the new darling in the halls where donors like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the United States and Britain talk about making sure foreign aid does not end up in the hands of corrupt regimes.

What they have in mind are people like Kofi Asare, who labors mightily on his modest farm high in the hills near his village SamSam, carrying his ripe yellow pineapples on his head to get them from the fields to his truck. Dripping with sweat, the 28-year-old Mr. Asare is the very picture of Africa getting its act together. Last year, he made $10,000; enough to make the transition from mud hut to cement house. This year, with an eye warily on the future, he has planted 2,500 of a new "low acid" pineapple pioneered by the Del Monte Foods Company that threatens to smoke the Ghana "smooth cayenne" variety out of Europe's supermarkets.

But Ghana is a good kid in a really bad neighborhood. Its West African neighbors, from Liberia to Sierra Leone to the Ivory Coast, have bred so much fighting in the last 10 years that they make Ghana seem like Iowa. Ghana does not have insurgents running around its hinterlands dressed in wedding gowns and wigs (like Liberia and Sierra Leone) or 8-year-old rebel soldiers toting machine guns (Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast).

It has had four successful elections since 1993, and has actually experienced a peaceful transfer of power between democratically elected governments, another rarity in the neighborhood. Indeed, it is becoming a haven for refugees who come not only from Ghana's unruly neighbors to the west, but also from other conflict zones in Africa. Last week, a group of refugees from Darfur, Sudan, showed up. It remains unclear how they made it across the continent, crossing the Togolese border from five countries away, but the Accra government is busy making plans to settle the Sudanese refugees.

Ghanaians like to brag that they have passed the point of no return in making their humid patch of West Africa a functioning democracy with all the perks that brings: a free and vibrant press, steady though slow economic growth, tourism. There is even a shopping mall with a multiplex cinema going up in Accra. With such obvious payoffs for adopting good governance, many Ghanaians say it is inconceivable that the country will turn back to the failed-state practices that have taken so many other African countries down the drain. "If anyone tried anything like a coup here, this place would immediately become ungovernable," says Kweku Sakyi Addo, the host of one of Ghana's innumerable political talk shows. "We've seen what happens in other African countries. There is no way people will put up with that here."

But for all the talk of what a model African country Ghana is, it is still, literally, dirt poor, a fact of life that demonstrates just how removed Africa is from the proverbial rising tide of the global economy that is supposed to be lifting all boats. Ghana has a per capita income of $421 a year; most people survive here on $300 to $400. Ten-year-old girls still run barefoot up to stopped cars in the sweltering midday heat trying to sell anything they think will bring in money - from oranges to cellphone batteries to toilet paper. Street children still sleep on the median separating highway lanes.

And while the Ghanaian government appears to have a clear idea of exactly what steps it must take to try to alleviate the huge divide between Accra's growing middle class and the country's rural poor, some goals are already slipping. Child mortality rates, already high, increased in 2004; nobody seems to know why. A huge gender gap remains in primary-school education: far more boys make it to school than girls.

Almost half of Ghana's national budget comes from foreign aid; Britain is its largest single-country donor. But the size of the country's budget, a scant $3 billion, supporting some 20 million people, is testament to just how far Ghana still has to go, and just how much more it still needs to climb out of poverty. British Prime Minister Tony Blair's proposal for rich countries to drastically increase their aid to Africa in a Marshall Plan approach would be a huge step toward helping to bring the continent back into the folds of the rest of the world.

Ghana shows what a tough road this is going to be. But it also shows that bringing Africa back is eminently doable.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top

this is a crazy policy! poor young nigerians! i already hate visa
policies, regardless of which country is issuing the visa. they must be
the biggest pain in the neck, ever! this policy seems to assume that
everyone who is between 18-30 wants to go and become an illegal
immigrant in the UK. what about those who want to go to school (for the
first time), a conference, business...

it's amazing how people spend YEARS at the top public policy schools
in the world and still create such HORRIBLE policy!


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UK visa delay for young Nigerians
Britain has imposed a ban on entry visas for young Nigerians aged
between 18 and 30 who intend to visit the UK for the first time.

The British High Commission in Nigeria says it cannot deal with the
high number of visa applications, which have nearly doubled in the last
two years.

The temporary ban will remain in force until next year, while the
office is reorganised to improve visa service.

But an official at the Nigerian presidency said it was "very unfair".

"We enjoy a close relationship with the United Kingdom," said Femi
Fani-Kayode, special assistant to the Nigerian president on public
affairs

"I don't think this is the way to strengthen ties between the two
countries."

Forged documents

The visa refusal rate is particularly high in Nigeria, where about 80%
of applications from young people are turned down.

Some are rejected because they have forged documents, says the BBC's
Anna Borzello in Lagos.

The UK Foreign Office said it will improve the service offered to
applicants.

We welcome Nigerians to the UK and we want to make sure that they
receive the best possible service
Foreign Office spokeswoman

"We are going to look at how applications are currently processed and
see if there are ways of making it more efficient," said a Foreign
Office spokeswoman.

Those studying in the UK, or members of Business Express - a scheme
for large companies with strong UK links - will not be affected.

And first-time visitors who are married to someone with proof they
have travelled to Britain in the last five years can also still apply.

Cases will also be considered in a "genuine emergency or on urgent
compassionate grounds", the Foreign Office said.

The British High Commission in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, and the
Deputy High Commission in Lagos deal with 23,000 visa applications a
month.

The spokeswoman said the Foreign Office did not want to stop all
applications and welcomed Nigerians to the UK.

'Entirely wrong'

But she added: "First-time visitors, particularly within that age
group [18 to 30], are particularly time-consuming, each has to be
interviewed and obviously an intention to return has to be verified."

Keith Best, chief executive of the Immigration Advisory Service, a
charity which advises immigrants, said they were considering opening an
office in Lagos to assist the local population.

He said he had opposed similar restrictions on working holiday visas
for people in Pakistan and thought the temporary ban in Nigeria was
"entirely wrong".

"If you open an immigration category then people should have access to
it. It's not their fault if there are inefficiencies in the system and
[officials] can't deal with it," he said.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch UK, said the decision to
delay visa applications was "without precedent."

"The government's policy - or lack of it - has triggered enormous
pressure on our visa issuing posts. Demand for visas has risen by a
third in the last five years to reach roughly two million a year.

"The Public Accounts Committee found recently that one in five posts
could no longer cope with daily demand for visas."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/4425079.stm

Published: 2005/04/11 02:34:37 GMT

i am already not a big fan of current immigration control policy. this
proposed change is going to be weird for people in the US to adjust to.
about 80% of americans don't own passports... it's crazy! i don't know
how they will change the country's cultures and ideology around freedom
to travel. most americans have never had to think about a passport or
visa when traveling. the lawyers are probably rubbing their hands
waiting for law suits against the government... someone's "rights"
somewhere are at threat... :-)

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/
2002232477_documents06m.html

Travel to the Caribbean, Mexico or even Canada, the federal government
soon will require that you have a valid passport to get back home.

And for the first time, our Canadian neighbors also will need a
passport to travel south of the border.

Aimed at further reinforcing the U.S. perimeter against terrorist
threats, the new rules for air, land and sea travel, announced
yesterday by the departments of State and Homeland Security, will be
phased in over two years between December 2005 and December 2007.

The impact of these changes could be especially strong in the Pacific
Northwest, just south of Canada's British Columbia, site of the 2010
Winter Olympic Games.

U.S. citizens returning now from trips to neighboring countries can
use a birth certificate and photo ID to gain entry.

The new rules will apply to U.S. citizens traveling from Canada,
Mexico, Bermuda, the Caribbean and Panama. Citizens of those countries
will also need a passport to enter the United States, which had
Canadian officials hinting yesterday that they may impose a similar
requirement on U.S. citizens traveling north.

Of the 1.2 million border crossings at Blaine between Oct. 1 and Dec.
31 last year, 61 percent were non-U.S. citizens. Of those, more than 90
percent were Canadian.

"This is intended to enhance border security," said Mike Millne, a
Homeland Security spokesman in Seattle. "Border officers now are
looking at car after car and all manner of ID — birth certificates,
driver's licenses from every state, church-denomination cards — all of
which are ripe for creating fraudulent documents. It's much harder to
create a fraudulent passport."

"Huge education challenge"
The new rules raise concern among some in the travel and
transportation industries who point out that up to 80 percent of
Americans have never owned a passport. (Sixty million Americans have
U.S. passports, according to the State Department, and officials expect
to issue 10 million more this year.)

check out the news clips with a mugabe interview here:
http://www.sabcnews.com/africa/southern_africa/0,2172,101261,00.html

as expected, the MDC says the results are not fair and don't reflect
the will of the people. i'm interested to know whether or not they will
participate in parliament on 'fraudulent' results...?

~dumi

ZANU PF wins a majority in the elections with enough seats to change the constitution...

Zimbabwe Africa National Unity (Patriotic Front) [ZANU PF]: 74
Movement for Democratic Change (MDC): 45
Independent: 1

Will post news news links as i get confirmation. got those results by text message (SMS) from a friend in Harare...

watch this space--will keep posting updates on elections in Zimbabwe as i either receive news from there, or as i find up to date stories...

Apparently as of 257 EST, the MDC has won 25 out of the first 29 constituencies counted!

In Other News: Low turn out? high turn out...?? you can't tell given that all these papers have different takes on it:

Low Turn Out: The Star--South Africa

High Turn Out: The New York Times