A sigh of relief for comrade Mbeki

Morgan Tsvangirai shakes hand with Robert Mugabe in Harare after reaching an agreement that set grounds for further negotiations on Monday.(File picture from www.aljazeera.net/english)

I was curious, watched the media, saw Zimbabweans flooding all over Johannesburg and watched some of them being attacked in the recent xenophobic attacks, even heard some of them criticising Mbeki for entertaining Mugabe. I was even more curious and decided to buy 'the dream deferred-Thabo Mbeki. This book gave me a clear background and contextual knowlege on the relationship between Mbeki and Mugabe. It is here that I once again came head-on with words such as comrade,neo-imperialism and the famous anti-imperialism debate came to my mind.

 Mbeki's arguments on African reinaissance is that Africans must find African solutions to their own problems and should avoid relying on the West for help. Further, he emphasizes that the West should trade fairly with Africa in the increasingly expanding global capital market as equal partners and not just act as a dumping site for excesses of capitalism.

The African market should be sustainable, and this self sustainability should be supported by the IMF and other regional trading blocks to reduce Africa's dependency on the West for financial assistance like SADC, COMESA and EAC. Of course, Mbeki's approach has led to a few breakthroughs such as the establishment of the AGOA Africa growth and opportunity Act which is actuality encouraging African manufacturers to find market for their products abroad at a fair price.

Another issue in Mbeki's debate is the muscling of the African Union which is a manifestation of the idea that Africa must strive to work towards unity to find solutions to the African problems.
His involvement towards this goal has been directed towards finding solutions to the problems facing Africa. Of course, with South Africa as an economic giant in Africa, he has succeeded in negotiation peace settlements in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Sudan the DRC, Somali and now in the neighboring country Zimbabwe.In Liberia, his efforts led to the first democratic elections in that country that saw the first female president in Africa elected.

Some of this countries have now found peace while others are still battling to find a solution, however, South Africa's and therefore Mbeki's presence is still felt in those countries as they strive to help them come to some form of an agreement through the African Union peace keeping force. And so AU has been quite active in Africa over the past couple of years.

The African Union was involved in helping find a peaceful solution to the Kenyan crisis through the help of the United nations. The African Union is also teaming up once again with the United Nations to find a local solution in Zimbabwe. This is what Mbeki calls African Renaissance. Africa should unite to find local solutions affecting the continent.

I don't mean to sound as if the African renaissance debate was the sole brainchild Mbeki, what I mean here is that Mbeki is following the vision of our African forefathers/leaders like Kwame Nkuruma of Ghana and Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya who saw the need for pan-Africanism which saw the birth of the Organization of African Union which later transformed to African Union as it now stands.

There is no doubt that Nkuruma or Kenyatta would be happy at the way in which the AU is currently influencing world politics on affairs concerning the African continent and furthermore, African countries are more bound to trust a deal brokered through their very own body (the AU) because of the perceived suspicion of the so called neo-imperialism.

And so many people raised concern about Mbeki's efforts in finding a peaceful solution to the Zimbabwe crisis and the efforts were later named 'quite diplomacy'. This term was very common in South Africa when referring to Mbeki and can account for the loss of Mbeki's popularity in some quarters of South African politics despite his economic achievements.

Nevertheless, Mbeki has been adamant in his approach, which is, that the people of Zimbabwe must seat together and come to some form of agreement that will be for the benefit of Zimbabwe and that South Africa and SADC will do everything necessary to support such efforts for a peaceful settlement. Unfortunately, this was dismissed as an empty rhetoric.

Mbeki was ambitious on gettimng both sides to reach an agreement to pave ways for a lasting solution rather than regime change parse. The current brokered deal which some suspect might use the Kenyan model has impetus for posterity because it will result, for one thing, to constitutional reforms that will pave way for genuine democratic institutions-such structures are lacking in Zimbabwe and many countries in Africa.

I will refer once again to an article published by Nyaga Munyi titled Kenya's crisis and challenges of democracy in Africa, in the article he argues that Africa’s democratic honeymoon is fast coming to an end, and Kenya’s sudden drift into chaos is a wake-up call across the continent for a more concerted investment in governance programmes.

After a decade of democratic gains, Africa now finds itself in a marshland, and Nigeria, Kenya and even South Africa (Africa pillars) are in a defining moment. The next five years will mark a watershed in the continent’s democratic consolidation.

He claims that the violence in Kenya, due to political discontent, brings into sharp focus the challenges of democracy in Africa and the need for heterodoxity in political governance among African governments and institutions working “to promote democracy” in Africa.

As far Zimbabwe is concerned, Mbeki has emerged as the best mediator because no doubt, and in his biography 'the dream deferred' Mugabe calls him 'young man' which technically elevates Mugabe to an African elder in the eyes of Mbeki. On the other hand, both  are comrades and therefore Mbeki is more likely to convince him of the importance of finding a solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe after all, what are comrades for.

Contesting the public sphere in the current democratic crisis in Kenya-Who sets the media Agenda, why and what next?

This article will discuss the recent political crisis in Kenya and the position of the Kenyan media following the 2007 disputed  election involving two main rival political parties, ODM and PNU. The critical questions here are: which voices did the media represent and why? and  what is the way forward for African democracy?

In an attempt to address these questions, a critical approach is taken on theories of the press such as agenda setting and bullet theories. This will be looked at in the context of theories of democracy, particularly, ‘rethinking public sphere by Jurgen Habermus and  alternative ideas of the public sphere championed by Kwame Appiah from Ghana, with a special look at  cosmopolitanism. But first, what is the public sphere?

The public sphere
According to Harbermus, this is a political space created only in the electioneering period where the ruling class position themselves to convince the electorate (mostly proletariats ) through campaigns that they are fit to be their leaders.


Lucy Oriang’ in her article in the Daily Nation dated 01st Feb. 2008 writes that “only a month or so ago, this country (Kenya) was awash with posters, huge spending on billboards and a massive assault on our senses in both print and electronic media. The political parties spent billions trying to win us over to their side. We were inspired, and the turnout was more than even the most optimistic of pundits could have anticipated”. Oriang's lamentation raises two issues in Kenya's politics, like politics elsewhere in the world. The idea that alot of money is spent on approving political messages to convince voters on certain party positions cannot be gainsaid.Therefore, campaign money and media houses are good bedfellows. So what's the special relationship between these two variables (The media and Money)? Clearly, campaigning and advertising is an expensive task. In the United States for instance, according to Fox news, US senator Barrack Obama had raised $52 million by June and Senator McCaine raised 21.5 million for their campaign respectively. Huge chunks of money spent there.

But what happens after elections?
Unlike Kenya, the US president to be is likely to deliver more on issues of policies preached during the campaign. However, they too are bound to inherit institutionalized state machinery that, over the years of America's existence, has been formed through solid and rigid foundations that defines the nation's existence and socio-economic strategic positioning in global politics and is unlikely to change with change in leadership. Having established this fact then, the famous ‘change campaign’ by Barrack Obama will be a little bit more of a change in the ‘actor’ at the level of the presidential figurehead and a different style of handling certain policies, especially the US foreign policy, than a radical shift on conservative ideas about America. We already see Obama visiting Afghanistan and pledging to increase the number of troops there. He actually claims that the ‘war on terror’ should shift from Iraq to Afghanistan. Of course, one should be careful when it comes to fighting terrorism and it is unfortunate that Obama will inevitably inherit this war  and the manner in which he handles it is still to be seen.

So what do elections really mean and do they actually bring genuine changes in the society or is it just an occasional material  manifestation of power hungry individuals? Harbermus see election as the climax of the public sphere contest. In his (1962) paper on the structural transformation of the public sphere “rethinking public sphere” Jurgen Habermus defines the public sphere as a political arena created only during the electioneering period to create a public space to contest for power. He therefore, sees it as a very seasonal, semi-permanent, almost artificial arrangement where the so called ruling class emerge to make promises to the proletariat if elected.

One interesting thing is that in order to make it to this arena, you must have wealth. In other words, you must be rich and that is why money is a big part of the electoral equation. In third world countries such as Kenya  and in some Western countries, it is mostly the rich who will make it to this arena which is always shocased through media publicity as billions of dollars go into servising political messages in the mainstream media. However, the truth is those who enjoy media publicity are the few who can afford such publicity. This means that the majority of the citizens will be faced with limited options when it comes to choice of leaders during elections because they have to choose from this limited group of "rich" people that have already occupied that space (public sphere). Any new entry into  the space is highly criticized and fought through propaganda and other means. These 'leaders' come with dozens of promises if elected. In the case of Kenya, Oriang has the following examples of promise that were given by Kenyan politicians

• Bad politics will inevitably breed bloodshed. Throw money into the mix, and there will be hell to pay. So there’s tension in the teaching ranks and the election is just around the corner? Give them a juicy pay raise, but let it be known that it is only effective after the election. That way you get to keep them on a leash.
• So the community next door is feeling that “one of their own” is not in a high level government position? Well, give a slew of them the shadowy title of assistant minister. That will take care of the shared national resources issue, never mind that they don’t really do any serious work and that they will not be sharing their pay with their constituents. Hell, no!
• AS FOR FREE EDUCATION, AN ELECTION is hardly the right time to refer to the small print to do with class sizes and all the extra costs that come with children going to school.
• Are the long suffering people up in the north complaining about “development” not reaching them? A handful of boreholes should do the trick. Better still, transfer some bulldozers to the district headquarters — and keep them there until after things have gone quiet. That way, they will not be asking how life is down there in Kenya.

I am sure you can find your own local examples of how cash campaigns have corrupted our politics. I will add another one not in Oriang’s list. And this one came from President Kibaki  when he was still campaigning…and I tuned on on this day, and saw him saying it on TV and I will loosely quote him in his typical Swahili off the records talk “ na hakuna haja ya mimi kuweka picha yangu kwa pesa nikikuwa Rais , la, mimi sita fanya hivyo” or there was no need of him introducing money with an imprint of his image. Guess what? Unashamedly, this was the first thing he did weeks after being sworn in as the President. He introduced a Sh 40 coin that the economy did not really need. After several criticisms he justified the introduction of the coin claiming it was a souvenir. At that point I knew nothing had changed
.
What next then for the electorate?

According to Harbermus, the proletariat creates their own space, almost like a cultural practice, called “the subaltern counter public” . This space is created as an attempt to resist the domination by the ruling class and to topple it if need be. It manifests itself through the formation of civil rights groups which spearhead civil disobedience, demonstrations, and strikes and sometimes creates lawlessness. However, in the absence of strong civil societies and workers union in Kenya, the public ‘take the law into their own hands’ and arrange unplanned demonstrations and protest. If the latter happens in the absence of security and order then violence and crime becomes an obvious option.

This is exactly what happened in Kenya. Is this a step in the right direction? Yes, according to Harbermus, it is a move towards democracy but only when the demonstrations are peaceful and do not violate Human rights. Should demonstrations be allowed to happen? Yes, in an ideal democratic situation, demonstrations are positive and should not be banned. Part of the reason why there were violent protests in Kenya was the fact that tensions were brewing between members of different tribes which can be related to a history of poverty and inequality brought about by unequal distribution of resources and a political culture of ethnicity. Habermus argues that in an ideal democracy, there should be  multiplicity of thoughts/opinions and, therefore, different voices should be given a chance to speak out and be accommodated in attempt to reach "common good." In addition’ Habermus advocates for greater equality among the citizens but, nevertheless, accepts that real equality is difficult to achieve in bracketed societies prompting him to talk of closing the gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have- nots’.

If we mirror this to what is happening in Kenya, clearly, the country was moving against the grain of ideal democracy.But why?

• Firstly, this was due to the fact that the government had no room for multiplicity of thoughts and had made the right to demonstrations and protests illegal, therefore if we are killing the subaltern counter public (a very crucial public in ideal democracy) and the culture so to speak, we cannot talk of liberty.
• Secondly, the gap between the rich and the poor has become even worse in Kibaki’s regime (I would like to revisit this contention in the future based on his leadership record). In the US citizens are asked whether they are better off now than the past four years and if the answer is no, then the incumbent President must be fired. Lastly, which brings me to the focus of this discussion, is that the press had been muzzled (another contention worth revisiting in the future) and therefore, the basic fundamental freedom of expression had been threatened thanks to internet blogs.

What then is the role played by the Kenyan Media?

The media has well been known to set agendas and to use values such as prominence in their effort to report news stories to satisfy the interests of the public. How then did the Kenyan media handle this election crisis?

The media in Kenya did a tremendous job prior to the elections covering campaigns and providing air time and space for candidates to reach the masses. The media equally did well in releasing opinion polls that largely predicted parliamentary election outcomes which came to materialise. Part of the reason why the presidential vote tallying was contested can be related to the fact that the media had extensively covered  the voting process and had been releasing unofficial results that Kenyans religiously believed. The dispute therefore emerged when the official results did not match what the media had predicted earlier. Knowing the influence and the power of the media, just minutes after being sworn in, the government banned all live broadcasting, a move that undermined freedom of the press and the very fundamental freedom of expression. Why did the government resort to such a move? Because the media is still considered powerful and can send messages like a ‘bullet’ that will 'kill' the audience. However, the move did not stop the violence between rival tribal groupings.

During this period the Kenyan Human rights Watch member Mr Maina Kiai in an article pubished by The Star, Tuesday 10 2008 titled Kenyan media spurns violence and calls for peace was quoted saying that "the kenyan media failed to search underneath the surface to look for the root cause of a political crisis". He was accusing the Kenyan media of hiding the reality, especially, related to what many saw as tribal cleansing related to the disputed presidential elections in Kenya. He argued that “The only way to peace is through truth and justice. It’s not enough to be calm; we need the truth". Kiai's criticisms helps this article  underscore two issues:

First, one of the roles of the media is to inform but within the boundaries of social responsibility. Even as the media strives to report the truth to the public by giving out facts and real objective accounts of events that take place to satisfy their interest, it has to do so in a manner not likely to incite the society into more violence.

Secondly, that the idea of tribalism is an identity problem and it is worsened by the stereotypes attached to the "other" whether negative or positive. Identity issues are ideological and one of the ways in which ideology thrives is through propaganda and naming or blaming the "other". The worst cases become violent and are infused with elements of tribal cleansing and possible genocide. The Senegalese president addressing this years AU summit in Ethiopia equated the Kenyan situation to some form of genocide.

However, the Kenyan media avoided the naming of either the victims or perpetrators of the violence and chose to preach peace. This was a positive move since the media abandoned the notion of commercializing news content for the sake of profits and resorted to investigative/critical journalism that later helped in the re-unification of Kenyans. This demonstrated a move to the much called for maturity needed regarding the conduct of the Kenyan media. It further proves that, at that difficult moment,  the Kenyan media really upheld its role as a watchdog.

In any human rights issue related to two or more conflicting interest groups, the rule of law anywhere in the world will defend the idea of balancing rights to see which one outweighs or  infringes on the other. In this case, the Kenyan media seems to have understood that the right to peace outweighs the right for Kenyans to know (freedom to receive information) which tribe was 'killing' which one and in what manner, something that would have only escalated the conflict. However, according to Sisule F. Msungu, writing from Geneva on the 24th of Jan 2008, there are ways in which the Kenyan media also failed Kenyans. He argues that Kenyans have always known the weakness of the ECK and the courts, which is why looking at the conduct of the media becomes important in thinking about what went wrong.

Msungu further argues that in successive polls over the years, Kenyans have consistently ranked the media as the most trusted institution coming ahead of even the church. Public institutions such as the courts and parliament have never won the confidence of the country. While there has been intense discussion about how the international media reported the post election violence, there has been little discussion about how the local media handled the whole situation. The media could, and should have provided credible and useful information regarding the issues and numbers in the disputed constituencies. The media also failed to appreciate the importance of the dispute, and reduced it to a two-man affair. The "it depends on Kibaki and Raila" approach which did not, and would not help.

Why did the Kenyan media initially failed to play the watchdog role to stand by the publicly announced results at the polling and constituency level to ensure that there was no fiddling or allegation of fiddling? Msungu points out that hours before the ECK declared Kibaki the winner, it was clear that the mainstream media -- with their extensive network -- had possession of most, if not all results and were in a position to publicly announced results but they failed to do so. He further claims  that both the Daily Nation on its website and the Kenya Television Network (KTN) did in fact display advanced figures on Dec. 30 before suddenly withdrawing the figures. The Daily Nation's figures, for example, showed Odinga with over 4.5 million votes and Kibaki at just over 4.2 million. In the USA the media officially declares the winner on Presidential elections based on independent opinion polling.

What then is democracy? Is it all about elections?

Democracy ideally, simply means the freedom to choose a leader that every citizen of a sovereign country should enjoy without being intimidated nor forced or threatened. In the West, and in countries like the United States, democracy goes hand in hand with the first amendment in the American constitution which means freedom of expression. Of course this includes freedom of religion, association, and a couple of other rights that are human rights and are embedded in the constitution. Within this context therefore, comes the right to vote and choose the leader one personally feels suitable to govern the sovereign state.

Freedom of the press  is an extension of individual freedom and rights as stipulated or as should be stipulated in every 'democratic country's constitution. Note that the word democracy is in quotes, this is because democracy itself is an ideal system  that has been perceived as an utopian concept, at least, according to Habermus. There is really nothing like democracy in world politics, especially in a country like Kenya. Even though Habermus conceded that it is difficult to achieve democracy in its ideal sense, he argues that a move towards ideal democracy is when there is multiplicity of thoughts for common good and greater equality among citizens and ,perhaps, this is the situation in leading democracies such as the United States and Britain. However, these two countries also have their own versions of inequality and seclusions.

According to Nyaga Munyi’s recent article titled "Kenya's crisis and challenges of democracy in Africa," Africa’s democratic honeymoon is fast coming to an end, and Kenya’s sudden drift into chaos is a wake-up call across the continent for a more concerted investment in governance programmes. After a decade of democratic gains, Africa now finds itself in a marshland, and Nigeria, Kenya and even South Africa are in a defining moment. The next five years will mark a watershed in the continent’s democratic consolidation.He claims that the violence in Kenya due to political discontent "brings into sharp focus the challenges of democracy in Africa and the need for heterodoxity in political governance among African governments and institutions working to promote democracy in Africa."

The situation in Kenya he continues "exposes the fragile nature of the country’s democracy and points to the role the international community should play in developing African politics which, like its music, moves in sweeping waves. Thus, the democratic disillusionment has produced two major trends in African politics, which will complicate the continent’s democratic development in the next decade — the ethnic and the socialist appeals." These trends, he concludes, "reflect responses to a sense of economic exclusion where ordinary people feel that the political institutions are not aptly responsive to their problems" as demonstrated in Africa's pillars of democracy.  As far as Kenya is concerned, the government has a difficult task and a long rugged road to go.This can be summed up by three things the government must do:

• The first one is to leave the media alone,
• The second one is to eradicate the biggest slum in in Kenya (Kibera) and others and
• Allow the opposition to stage peaceful protests and their agenda be included in the constitution for common good.

The second point above is unlikely to materialize any time soon but regarding  the third, at least there is the government of National Unity running to ensure there are some radical shifts in the way the institutions that defend democracy like the legislature, judiciary and media operate. This can be achieved  through constitutional amendments that are already taking shape.

So what next for Kenya and democracy in the Africa?

In his essay on cosmopolitanism, Appiah  talks of a situation where there is interaction through intelligence and curiosity as well as engagement. This means that people are driven through shared common human values and do not regard each other as strangers “othering”. This can be made more practical through media interaction, especially through new media such as internet blogging, where people can interact as a way towards reaching a common goal. No wonder Kenyans kept the world informed through internet blogs when a ‘state of emergency’ was declared on the media by the incumbent regime, banning all live broadcast at the height of the post-election violence. For Appiah, when there is an opportunity for people to have dialogue on contetious issues for mutual understanding, it is more of a move towards a cosmopolitan society.

Writers Profile: Fredrick Ogenga has a bachelors and a masters degree in Media & Journalism studies. He is an independent media consultant & analyst, a freelance writer, reporter for africanews.com, lecturer  and the founding director of Tazama Media Consultants. He is also pursuing a PhD in media studies at the University of Witwatersrand. Ogenga has published widely in the field of gender, HIV/AIDS, health and other socio-political issues and is listed in the UNAIDS database of consultants. His latest contribution on gender and HIV/AIDS can be found in the fourth issue of the 2008 media diversity journal at www.genderlinks.org.za. He also runs his own blog www.tazamamediaconsultants.blogspot.com