SLAVE TRADE: A ROOT OF CONTEMPORARY AFRICAN CRISIS

Mr. leonard C.K 


"The past is what makes the present coherent," said Afro-American writer James Baldwin, and the past "will remain horrible for exactly as long as we refuse to assess it honestly."
Why go back five centuries to start an explanation of Africa's crisis in the late 1990s? Must every story of Africa's political and economic under-development begin with the contact with Europe? The intention is not to produce another nationalist tract on how whites, driven by lust for material possession and armed with firearms, gin and a bag full of tricks, subjugated innocent Africans who were living blissfully close to nature. The reason for looking back is that the root of the crisis facing African societies is their failure to come to terms with the consequences of that contact.
Portuguese seamen first landed in Africa in the fourth decade of the fifteenth century. From the outset they seized Africans and shipped them to Europe. In 1441 ten Africans were kidnapped from the Guinea coast and taken to Portugal as gifts to Prince Henry the Navigator. In subsequent expeditions to the West African coast, inhabitants were taken and shipped to Portugal to be sold as servants and objects of curiosity to households. In the Portuguese port of Lagos, where the first African slaves landed in 1442, the old slave market now serves as an art gallery.
Portuguese adventurers who sailed southeast along the Gulf of Guinea in 1472 landed on the coast of what became Nigeria. Others followed. They found people of varying cultures. Some lived in towns ruled by kings with nobility and courtiers, very much like the medieval societies they left behind them. A Dutch visitor to Benin City wrote in around 1600: "As you enter it, the town appears very great. You go into a great broad street, not paved, which seems to be seven or eight times broader than the Warmoes Street in Amsterdam...The houses in this town stand in good order, one close and even with the other, as the houses in Holland stand..." More than a century earlier Benin exchanged ambassadors with Portugal. But not all African societies were as developed. Some enjoyed village existence in primeval forests remote from outside influences.
Economics was the driving force
From the outset, relations between Europe and Africa were economic. Portuguese merchants traded with Africans from trading posts they set up along the coast. They exchanged items like brass and copper bracelets for such products as pepper, cloth, beads and slaves - all part of an existing internal African trade. Domestic slavery was common in Africa and well before European slave buyers arrived, there was trading in humans. Black slaves were captured or bought by Arabs and exported across the Saharan desert to the Mediterranean and Near East.
In 1492, the Spaniard Christopher Columbus discovered for Europe a 'New World'. The find proved disastrous not only for the 'discovered' people but also for Africans. It marked the beginning of a triangular trade between Africa, Europe and the New World. European slave ships, mainly British and French, took people from Africa to the New World. They were initially taken to the West Indies to supplement local Indians decimated by the Spanish Conquistadors. The slave trade grew from a trickle to a flood, particularly from the seventeenth century onwards.
Portugal's monopoly in the obnoxious trade was broken in the sixteenth century when England followed by France and other European nations entered the trade. The English led in the business of transporting young Africans from their homeland to work in mines and till lands in the Americas.
Most slaves sold by Africans
Estimates of the total human loss to Africa over the four centuries of the transatlantic slave trade range from 30 million to 200 million. At the initial stage of the trade parties of Europeans captured Africans in raids on communities in the coastal areas. But this soon gave way to buying slaves from African rulers and traders. The vast majority of slaves taken out of Africa were sold by African rulers, traders and a military aristocracy who all grew wealthy from the business. Most slaves were acquired through wars or by kidnapping. The Portuguese Duatre Pacheco Pereire wrote in the early sixteenth century after a visit to Benin that the kingdom "is usually at war with its neighbours and takes many captives, whom we buy at twelve or fifteen brass bracelets each, or for copper bracelets, which they prize more." Olaudah Equiano, an ex-slave, described in his memoirs published in 1789 how African rulers carried out raids to capture slaves. "When a trader wants slaves, he applies to a chief for them, and tempts him with his wares. It is not extraordinary, if on this occasion he yields to the temptation with as little firmness, and accepts the price of his fellow creature's liberty with as little reluctance, as the enlightened merchant. Accordingly, he falls upon his neighbours, and a desperate battle ensues...if he prevails, and takes prisoners, he gratifies his avarice by selling them." Equiano was born in 1745 in an area under the kingdom of Benin. At the age of ten he was kidnapped by slave hunters who also took his sister. He was more fortunate than most other slaves. After serving in America, the West Indies and England he was able to save for and buy his freedom in 1756 at the age of twenty-one.
Ottobah Cugoano, who was about 13 years old when he was kidnapped in 1770 in Ajumako in today's Ghana, had no doubt the shared responsibility of Africans for the horrid business. Referring to his own capture Cugoano wrote after he regained his freedom "I must own, to the shame of my own countrymen, that I was first kidnapped and betrayed by some of my own complexion, who were the first cause of my exile and slavery." But he added, "If there were no buyers there would be no sellers." By the same token, if there were no sellers there would be no buyers.
A profitable trade
European slave buyers made the greater profit from the despicable trade, but their African partners also prospered. Many grew strong and fat on profits made from selling their brethren. Tinubu square, commercial centre of today's Lagos and home to Nigeria's Central Bank, is named after a major nineteenth century slave trader. Madam Tinubu was born in Egbaland and rose from rags to riches by trading in slaves , salt and tobacco in Badagry. She later became one of Nigeria's pioneering nationalists.
Africa's rulers, traders and military aristocracy protected their interest in the slave trade. They discouraged Europeans from leaving the coastal areas to venture into the interior of the continent. European trading companies realised the benefit of dealing with African suppliers and not unnecessarily antagonising them. The companies could not have mustered the resources it would have taken to directly capture the tens of millions of people shipped out of Africa. It was far more sensible and safer to give Africans guns to fight the many wars that yielded captives for the trade. The slave trading network stretched deep into the Africa's interior. Slave trading firms were aware of their dependency on African suppliers. The Royal African Company, for instance, instructed its agents on the West coast "if any differences happen, to endeavour an amicable accommodation rather than use force." They were "to endeavour to live in all friendship with them" and "to hold frequent palavers with the Kings and the Great Men of the Country, and keep up a good correspondent with them, ingratiating yourself by such prudent methods" as may be deemed appropriate.
Africans faced with a new world
Contact with Europe opened new images of the world for the African elite and presented them with products of a civilisation which as the centuries passed became more technologically differentiated from their own. The slave trade whetted their appetite for the products of a changing world. Sadly it was not only tinpot rulers who were mesmerised by the glitters of western artefacts. An African slave in Cuba in the nineteenth century recalled how his people were captivated by the bright colour of European manufacturers. "It was the scarlet which did for the Africans: both the kings and the rest surrendered without a struggle. When the kings saw that the whites were taking out these scarlet handkerchiefs as if they were waving, they told the blacks, "Go on then, go get a scarlet handkerchief" and the blacks were so excited by the scarlet they ran down to the ships, like sheep and there were captured."
European traders saw the advantages of helping African kings and chiefs realise their desire to acquire western culture, if not for themselves then for their children. Hugh Crow, who commanded the last British slave ship to leave a British port, wrote "It has always been the practice of merchants and commanders of ships to Africa, to encourage the natives to send their children to England as it not only conciliates their friendship, and softens their manner, but adds greatly to the security of the traders." With their children in Europe, African chiefs were likely to be more accommodating, knowing full well their offspring could be held as ransom.
European powers also hoped that by entertaining African princes in Europe to win the friendship of their fathers. By far the most important reason why African rulers and traders participated in the slave trade was their desire for its material rewards and the power it brought. They were obsessed with the variety of goods available through the trade. Locally produced equivalents of some merchandise, like cloth and jewellery, existed but greater satisfaction and prestige was got from having imported varieties. The man with a warehouse full with goods from abroad was a powerful figure in the community, able to buy favours and influence with his ill-gotten wealth.
African traders resist abolition of obnoxious trade
When Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807 it not only had to contend with opposition from white slavers but also from African rulers who had become accustomed to wealth gained from selling slaves or from taxes collected on slaves passed through their domain. African slave-trading classes were greatly distressed by the news that legislators sitting in parliament in London had decided to end their source of livelihood. But for as long as there was demand from the Americas for slaves, the lucrative business continued.
English missionary and abolitionist Thomas Buxton wrote in 1840 that the best way to suppress the slave trade was to offer Africa's slaving elites legitimate business that would give them means to satisfy their hunger for Western goods. "The African has acquired a taste for the civilised world. They have become essential to his. To say that the African, under present circumstances, shall not deal in man, is to say he shall long in vain for his accustomed gratification." This was the crux of the African condition.
The slave trade business continued in many parts of Africa for many decades after the British abolished it. For as long as there was demand for slave labour in the Americas, the supply was available. The British set up a naval blockade to stop ships carrying slaves from West Africa, but it was not very effective in suppressing the trade. Thousands of slave ships were detained during the decades the blockade was in operation. One Lieutenant Patrick Forbes, a British naval officer, estimated in 1849 that during a period of 26 years 103,000 slaves were emancipated by the warships of the naval blockade while ships carrying 1,795,000 slaves managed to slip past the blockage and land their cargo in the Americas.
British efforts to suppress the trade made it even more profitable because the price of slaves rose in the Americas. The numerous wars that plagued Yorubaland for half a century following the fall of the Oyo empire was largely driven by demand for slaves. Reverend Samuel Johnson wrote of the subjugation of neighbouring Yoruba kingdoms by Ibadan war-chiefs in the 1850s: "Slave-raiding now became a trade to many who would get rich speedily." It took the intervention of British colonialism to impose peace in Yorubaland in 1893. Slave trading for export ended in Nigeria and elsewhere in West Africa after slavery ended in the Spanish colonies of Brazil and Cuba in 1880. A consequence of the ending of the slave trade was the expansion of domestic slavery as African businessmen replaced trade in human chattel with increased export of primary commodities. Labour was needed to cultivate the new source of wealth for the African elites.
What if the West not abolish slavery?
Had Europe not decided to end the slave trade and the New World ceased demanding chattel labour, the transatlantic trade might still be rolling today. The ending of the obnoxious business had nothing to do with events in Africa. Rulers and traders there would have happily continued to sell humans for as long as there was demand for them. One can only imagine how more determinedly African merchants would have clung on to the business as goods offered by European buyers became more attractive with changes in Western technology. How many souls would African chiefs have been prepared to trade for a television or a car? It is a disturbing thought.
To highlight the role of the African elites in the slave trade is not to argue the obvious that they were morally depraved like the Europeans who bought slaves from them. It is to show that the corrupt leadership that undermines democracy and economic development in African countries today has a long history. The selfishness and disregard for the welfare of fellow humans manifest in the sacking of national resources by modern African leaders also motivated the pillaging of the human resources of the continent in times past.
A long history of corrupt African rulng classes
Some African writers, seeking to maximise the culpability of Europe in the slave trade, minimise the part played by African rulers and traders or explain it as the result of white trickery. Such distortion of history may make the moral case against European imperialism seem sharper, but it does nothing to aid the understanding by Africans of a critical period of their history. African slavers acted out of their own volition and for their self interest. They took advantage of the opportunity provided by Europe to consume the products of its civilisation. The triangular slave trade was a major part in the early stages of the emergence of the international market. The role of slave-trading African ruling classes in this market is not radically different from the position of the African elite in today's global economy. They both traded the resources of their people for their own gratification and prosperity. In the process they helped to weaken their nations and dim their prospects for economic and social development.
The slave trade had a profound economic, social, cultural and psychological impact on African societies and peoples. It did more to undermine African development than the colonialism that followed it. Through the trade the continent lost a large proportion of its young and able bodied population. Guyanese historian Walter Rodney cites in his book 'How Europe Underdeveloped Africa' one estimate showing that while Europe's population more than quadruped between 1650 and 1900, Africa's population rose only by 20 per cent during the same period. The loss of work-force was not more serious than the damage to the social and economic fabric of the society and the undermining of the confidence of Africans in their historical evolution.
The transatlantic slave trade and slavery were major elements in the emergence of capitalism in the West. As Karl Marx noted, they were as pivotal to western industrialisation as the new machinery and financial systems. Slavery gave value to the colonies in the New World which were crucial in the development of international trade. Trinidadian historian Eric Williams showed in his well-researched book Capitalism and Slavery, that the slave trade and slavery helped to make England the workshop of the world. Profit from slave-worked colonies and the slave trade were major sources of capital accumulation which helped finance the industrial revolution. The transportation of slave transformed British seaport areas into booming centres. One Englishman calling himself 'A Genuine "Dicky Sam", had no doubt about the link between the slave trade and prosperity of seaport city of Liverpool. "Like the magical wand, the traffic worked wonders; once poor, now rich; once ignoble, now great. Churches have been built and grand legacies bequeathed to all sorts of charities."
Europeans built empires, Africans drunk gin
While Europe invested profits from the trade in laying the foundation of a powerful economic empire, African kings and traders were content with wearing used caps and admiring themselves in worthless mirrors while swigging adulterated brandy bought with the freedom of their kinsmen. Virtually all the items imported during the nefarious business were for consumption or weapons for waging wars. A slave ship's manifest published in 1665 listed items carried for sale to Africans as old hats, caps, salt, swords, knives, axe-heads, hammers, belts, sheepskin gloves, bracelets, iron jugs and even "cats to catch their mice." One African trader calling himself Grandy King George was quite specific in his demand. He wrote to a slave captain: "send me one lucking-glass, six foot long by six foot wide." He also asked for an armchair, a gold mounted cane and a stool." The more common imports were alcohol, guns and gunpowder , salt and textiles. The quality of the items shipped to Africa was inferior - the spirits were adulterated and the guns designed for the African market.
Africa's contemporary history may have been different had its rulers and traders demanded capital goods for use in building the economy rather than trinkets and booze. As it was, the slave trade arrested economic development in Africa. The loss in human resources had dire consequences for labour dependent agricultural economies. Any possibility that the internal dynamics of African society could have led to the development of capitalism and industrialisation was blocked by the slave trade. The few existing manufacturing activities were either destroyed or denied conditions for growth. Cheap European textiles, for instance, undermined local cloth production. Samuel Johnson wrote in the late nineteenth century about Yorubaland: "Before the period of intercourse with Europeans, all articles made of iron and steel, from weapons of war to pins and needles, were of home manufacture; but the cheaper and more finished articles of European make, especially cutlery, though less durable are fast displacing home-made wares." The predominance of the slave trade prevented the emergence of business classes that could have spearheaded the internal exploitation of the resources of their societies. The slave trade drew African societies into the international economy but as fodder for western economic development.
Africa devastated by slave trade wars
Inter-communal wars waged to procure slaves were intensely destructive of human lives. Tens of thousands of people were slaughtered in a single skirmish. The wars and rampant kidnappings fuelled hostility and suspicion between communities. Distrust was a basic requirement for individual and communal survival. The slave trade arrested and distorted the cultural development of African societies. It affected the meaning people gave to the world and their place within it. Increased uncertainty of life gave added force to superstitious beliefs and customs. People sought salvation and protection from the spiritual world. They paid homage to gods to safeguard themselves and their families from misfortune. The psychological impact of the dehumanising trade was crippling. There was constant anxiety caused by perpetual fear of being captured and herded away like common animals to a place of no return. Some Africans believed that whites took slaves to eat them.
Whites assert racial superiority
It was during the slave trade and slavery that white people affirmed their superiority over blacks. It is not difficult to understand why white traders who bought black people for price of adulterated brandy and packed them onto slave ships like cattle could consider themselves to be superior. Though most were illiterate, crude and drunken, white slave traders were free men herding flocks of human cattle. As the centuries passed Europeans became more and more scornful of black people. By the nineteenth century various theories of black inferiority were developed and used to justify the colonisation of Africa. During the slave trade Africans came to believe themselves to be inferior. They lost confidence in themselves, their culture and their ability to development. The late Afro-American civil rights leader Martin Luther King's comment that few people realise the extent that slavery had "scarred the soul and wounded the spirit of the black man," holds true not only with respect to the descendants of the Africans who arrived in the New World but also the descendants of those left behind. "The backwardness of black Africa," said the late Senegalese president Leopold Senghor, "...has been caused less by colonialism than by the Slave Trade."
Would the history of Africa have been turned out differently had it's leaders taken the advice of eighteenth century French thinker Jean Jacques Rousseau. He said: "If I were chief of one of the African peoples, I declare that I would have a gallows set up at the frontier, on which I would hang, without mercy, the first European who dared enter the country, and the first citizen who tried to leave it." Perhaps if more African rulers had militarily resisted the design of the better armed Europeans their peoples might have paid a bloody price, as did the Indians in the Americas who fought to keep their lands and expel the white intruders. Before Columbus arrived in Hispanoila in 1492, the native population of North America was perhaps 40 million. By 1900, in the U.S. less than quarter of a million remained, scattered among 1,500 remote reservations.
Africa's underdevelopment was not inevitable
Would Africans have suffered the same genocide had they tried to end the slave trade? Unlikely. It is doubtful that the human cost of resistance would have been greater than the many millions of Africans killed in slave producing wars as well as those eaten by sharks after being jettisoned during the Atlantic crossings. We cannot know for certain. It seems more likely that Europe would have had to look elsewhere for cheap labour. It was one thing for European nations to use military might to protect their coastal trading posts and subdue disgruntled local chiefs, it would have been an entirely different matter for them to penetrate the interior of the continent and fight the hundreds of war that fed the slave trade.
The cost of such ventures would have made the price of slaves unattractive to the plantation owners in the Americas. As the historian Philip Curtin noted " If the prices of African-born slaves had not been competitive with those of labour from other sources - native born or European - the slave trade could never have come into existence, no matter what the epidemiological consequences of movement across the Atlantic."
Had cheap Africans not been available to work the land and mines of the 'New World', white planters and landowners would have sought other sources of cheap labour. They would have made more use of the native population and also turned more to Europe for labour. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries large numbers of poor whites were shipped to the 'New World', most involuntarily, to work on plantations, mines and as servants. Some poor whites kidnapped on European streets were sold in the West Indies much in the same way as Africans were. Indentured servants, convicts and deportees from Europe were often treated not much better than black slaves. But as the transatlantic slave trade boomed, the number of whites in forced labour decreased. It was because of the relative cheapness of African slave labour, and therefore the plantation owners' preference for them, that the trade in white labour ended. This gave rise to what Afro-American writer William DuBois described as the replacement of "a caste of condition by a caste of race." Had the costs of black slaves been much dearer, Europe might have become a major source of unfree labour

SLAVE TRADE: A ROOT OF CONTEMPORARY AFRICAN CRISIS

Mr. leonard C.K 


"The past is what makes the present coherent," said Afro-American writer James Baldwin, and the past "will remain horrible for exactly as long as we refuse to assess it honestly."
Why go back five centuries to start an explanation of Africa's crisis in the late 1990s? Must every story of Africa's political and economic under-development begin with the contact with Europe? The intention is not to produce another nationalist tract on how whites, driven by lust for material possession and armed with firearms, gin and a bag full of tricks, subjugated innocent Africans who were living blissfully close to nature. The reason for looking back is that the root of the crisis facing African societies is their failure to come to terms with the consequences of that contact.
Portuguese seamen first landed in Africa in the fourth decade of the fifteenth century. From the outset they seized Africans and shipped them to Europe. In 1441 ten Africans were kidnapped from the Guinea coast and taken to Portugal as gifts to Prince Henry the Navigator. In subsequent expeditions to the West African coast, inhabitants were taken and shipped to Portugal to be sold as servants and objects of curiosity to households. In the Portuguese port of Lagos, where the first African slaves landed in 1442, the old slave market now serves as an art gallery.
Portuguese adventurers who sailed southeast along the Gulf of Guinea in 1472 landed on the coast of what became Nigeria. Others followed. They found people of varying cultures. Some lived in towns ruled by kings with nobility and courtiers, very much like the medieval societies they left behind them. A Dutch visitor to Benin City wrote in around 1600: "As you enter it, the town appears very great. You go into a great broad street, not paved, which seems to be seven or eight times broader than the Warmoes Street in Amsterdam...The houses in this town stand in good order, one close and even with the other, as the houses in Holland stand..." More than a century earlier Benin exchanged ambassadors with Portugal. But not all African societies were as developed. Some enjoyed village existence in primeval forests remote from outside influences.
Economics was the driving force
From the outset, relations between Europe and Africa were economic. Portuguese merchants traded with Africans from trading posts they set up along the coast. They exchanged items like brass and copper bracelets for such products as pepper, cloth, beads and slaves - all part of an existing internal African trade. Domestic slavery was common in Africa and well before European slave buyers arrived, there was trading in humans. Black slaves were captured or bought by Arabs and exported across the Saharan desert to the Mediterranean and Near East.
In 1492, the Spaniard Christopher Columbus discovered for Europe a 'New World'. The find proved disastrous not only for the 'discovered' people but also for Africans. It marked the beginning of a triangular trade between Africa, Europe and the New World. European slave ships, mainly British and French, took people from Africa to the New World. They were initially taken to the West Indies to supplement local Indians decimated by the Spanish Conquistadors. The slave trade grew from a trickle to a flood, particularly from the seventeenth century onwards.
Portugal's monopoly in the obnoxious trade was broken in the sixteenth century when England followed by France and other European nations entered the trade. The English led in the business of transporting young Africans from their homeland to work in mines and till lands in the Americas.
Most slaves sold by Africans
Estimates of the total human loss to Africa over the four centuries of the transatlantic slave trade range from 30 million to 200 million. At the initial stage of the trade parties of Europeans captured Africans in raids on communities in the coastal areas. But this soon gave way to buying slaves from African rulers and traders. The vast majority of slaves taken out of Africa were sold by African rulers, traders and a military aristocracy who all grew wealthy from the business. Most slaves were acquired through wars or by kidnapping. The Portuguese Duatre Pacheco Pereire wrote in the early sixteenth century after a visit to Benin that the kingdom "is usually at war with its neighbours and takes many captives, whom we buy at twelve or fifteen brass bracelets each, or for copper bracelets, which they prize more." Olaudah Equiano, an ex-slave, described in his memoirs published in 1789 how African rulers carried out raids to capture slaves. "When a trader wants slaves, he applies to a chief for them, and tempts him with his wares. It is not extraordinary, if on this occasion he yields to the temptation with as little firmness, and accepts the price of his fellow creature's liberty with as little reluctance, as the enlightened merchant. Accordingly, he falls upon his neighbours, and a desperate battle ensues...if he prevails, and takes prisoners, he gratifies his avarice by selling them." Equiano was born in 1745 in an area under the kingdom of Benin. At the age of ten he was kidnapped by slave hunters who also took his sister. He was more fortunate than most other slaves. After serving in America, the West Indies and England he was able to save for and buy his freedom in 1756 at the age of twenty-one.
Ottobah Cugoano, who was about 13 years old when he was kidnapped in 1770 in Ajumako in today's Ghana, had no doubt the shared responsibility of Africans for the horrid business. Referring to his own capture Cugoano wrote after he regained his freedom "I must own, to the shame of my own countrymen, that I was first kidnapped and betrayed by some of my own complexion, who were the first cause of my exile and slavery." But he added, "If there were no buyers there would be no sellers." By the same token, if there were no sellers there would be no buyers.
A profitable trade
European slave buyers made the greater profit from the despicable trade, but their African partners also prospered. Many grew strong and fat on profits made from selling their brethren. Tinubu square, commercial centre of today's Lagos and home to Nigeria's Central Bank, is named after a major nineteenth century slave trader. Madam Tinubu was born in Egbaland and rose from rags to riches by trading in slaves , salt and tobacco in Badagry. She later became one of Nigeria's pioneering nationalists.
Africa's rulers, traders and military aristocracy protected their interest in the slave trade. They discouraged Europeans from leaving the coastal areas to venture into the interior of the continent. European trading companies realised the benefit of dealing with African suppliers and not unnecessarily antagonising them. The companies could not have mustered the resources it would have taken to directly capture the tens of millions of people shipped out of Africa. It was far more sensible and safer to give Africans guns to fight the many wars that yielded captives for the trade. The slave trading network stretched deep into the Africa's interior. Slave trading firms were aware of their dependency on African suppliers. The Royal African Company, for instance, instructed its agents on the West coast "if any differences happen, to endeavour an amicable accommodation rather than use force." They were "to endeavour to live in all friendship with them" and "to hold frequent palavers with the Kings and the Great Men of the Country, and keep up a good correspondent with them, ingratiating yourself by such prudent methods" as may be deemed appropriate.
Africans faced with a new world
Contact with Europe opened new images of the world for the African elite and presented them with products of a civilisation which as the centuries passed became more technologically differentiated from their own. The slave trade whetted their appetite for the products of a changing world. Sadly it was not only tinpot rulers who were mesmerised by the glitters of western artefacts. An African slave in Cuba in the nineteenth century recalled how his people were captivated by the bright colour of European manufacturers. "It was the scarlet which did for the Africans: both the kings and the rest surrendered without a struggle. When the kings saw that the whites were taking out these scarlet handkerchiefs as if they were waving, they told the blacks, "Go on then, go get a scarlet handkerchief" and the blacks were so excited by the scarlet they ran down to the ships, like sheep and there were captured."
European traders saw the advantages of helping African kings and chiefs realise their desire to acquire western culture, if not for themselves then for their children. Hugh Crow, who commanded the last British slave ship to leave a British port, wrote "It has always been the practice of merchants and commanders of ships to Africa, to encourage the natives to send their children to England as it not only conciliates their friendship, and softens their manner, but adds greatly to the security of the traders." With their children in Europe, African chiefs were likely to be more accommodating, knowing full well their offspring could be held as ransom.
European powers also hoped that by entertaining African princes in Europe to win the friendship of their fathers. By far the most important reason why African rulers and traders participated in the slave trade was their desire for its material rewards and the power it brought. They were obsessed with the variety of goods available through the trade. Locally produced equivalents of some merchandise, like cloth and jewellery, existed but greater satisfaction and prestige was got from having imported varieties. The man with a warehouse full with goods from abroad was a powerful figure in the community, able to buy favours and influence with his ill-gotten wealth.
African traders resist abolition of obnoxious trade
When Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807 it not only had to contend with opposition from white slavers but also from African rulers who had become accustomed to wealth gained from selling slaves or from taxes collected on slaves passed through their domain. African slave-trading classes were greatly distressed by the news that legislators sitting in parliament in London had decided to end their source of livelihood. But for as long as there was demand from the Americas for slaves, the lucrative business continued.
English missionary and abolitionist Thomas Buxton wrote in 1840 that the best way to suppress the slave trade was to offer Africa's slaving elites legitimate business that would give them means to satisfy their hunger for Western goods. "The African has acquired a taste for the civilised world. They have become essential to his. To say that the African, under present circumstances, shall not deal in man, is to say he shall long in vain for his accustomed gratification." This was the crux of the African condition.
The slave trade business continued in many parts of Africa for many decades after the British abolished it. For as long as there was demand for slave labour in the Americas, the supply was available. The British set up a naval blockade to stop ships carrying slaves from West Africa, but it was not very effective in suppressing the trade. Thousands of slave ships were detained during the decades the blockade was in operation. One Lieutenant Patrick Forbes, a British naval officer, estimated in 1849 that during a period of 26 years 103,000 slaves were emancipated by the warships of the naval blockade while ships carrying 1,795,000 slaves managed to slip past the blockage and land their cargo in the Americas.
British efforts to suppress the trade made it even more profitable because the price of slaves rose in the Americas. The numerous wars that plagued Yorubaland for half a century following the fall of the Oyo empire was largely driven by demand for slaves. Reverend Samuel Johnson wrote of the subjugation of neighbouring Yoruba kingdoms by Ibadan war-chiefs in the 1850s: "Slave-raiding now became a trade to many who would get rich speedily." It took the intervention of British colonialism to impose peace in Yorubaland in 1893. Slave trading for export ended in Nigeria and elsewhere in West Africa after slavery ended in the Spanish colonies of Brazil and Cuba in 1880. A consequence of the ending of the slave trade was the expansion of domestic slavery as African businessmen replaced trade in human chattel with increased export of primary commodities. Labour was needed to cultivate the new source of wealth for the African elites.
What if the West not abolish slavery?
Had Europe not decided to end the slave trade and the New World ceased demanding chattel labour, the transatlantic trade might still be rolling today. The ending of the obnoxious business had nothing to do with events in Africa. Rulers and traders there would have happily continued to sell humans for as long as there was demand for them. One can only imagine how more determinedly African merchants would have clung on to the business as goods offered by European buyers became more attractive with changes in Western technology. How many souls would African chiefs have been prepared to trade for a television or a car? It is a disturbing thought.
To highlight the role of the African elites in the slave trade is not to argue the obvious that they were morally depraved like the Europeans who bought slaves from them. It is to show that the corrupt leadership that undermines democracy and economic development in African countries today has a long history. The selfishness and disregard for the welfare of fellow humans manifest in the sacking of national resources by modern African leaders also motivated the pillaging of the human resources of the continent in times past.
A long history of corrupt African rulng classes
Some African writers, seeking to maximise the culpability of Europe in the slave trade, minimise the part played by African rulers and traders or explain it as the result of white trickery. Such distortion of history may make the moral case against European imperialism seem sharper, but it does nothing to aid the understanding by Africans of a critical period of their history. African slavers acted out of their own volition and for their self interest. They took advantage of the opportunity provided by Europe to consume the products of its civilisation. The triangular slave trade was a major part in the early stages of the emergence of the international market. The role of slave-trading African ruling classes in this market is not radically different from the position of the African elite in today's global economy. They both traded the resources of their people for their own gratification and prosperity. In the process they helped to weaken their nations and dim their prospects for economic and social development.
The slave trade had a profound economic, social, cultural and psychological impact on African societies and peoples. It did more to undermine African development than the colonialism that followed it. Through the trade the continent lost a large proportion of its young and able bodied population. Guyanese historian Walter Rodney cites in his book 'How Europe Underdeveloped Africa' one estimate showing that while Europe's population more than quadruped between 1650 and 1900, Africa's population rose only by 20 per cent during the same period. The loss of work-force was not more serious than the damage to the social and economic fabric of the society and the undermining of the confidence of Africans in their historical evolution.
The transatlantic slave trade and slavery were major elements in the emergence of capitalism in the West. As Karl Marx noted, they were as pivotal to western industrialisation as the new machinery and financial systems. Slavery gave value to the colonies in the New World which were crucial in the development of international trade. Trinidadian historian Eric Williams showed in his well-researched book Capitalism and Slavery, that the slave trade and slavery helped to make England the workshop of the world. Profit from slave-worked colonies and the slave trade were major sources of capital accumulation which helped finance the industrial revolution. The transportation of slave transformed British seaport areas into booming centres. One Englishman calling himself 'A Genuine "Dicky Sam", had no doubt about the link between the slave trade and prosperity of seaport city of Liverpool. "Like the magical wand, the traffic worked wonders; once poor, now rich; once ignoble, now great. Churches have been built and grand legacies bequeathed to all sorts of charities."
Europeans built empires, Africans drunk gin
While Europe invested profits from the trade in laying the foundation of a powerful economic empire, African kings and traders were content with wearing used caps and admiring themselves in worthless mirrors while swigging adulterated brandy bought with the freedom of their kinsmen. Virtually all the items imported during the nefarious business were for consumption or weapons for waging wars. A slave ship's manifest published in 1665 listed items carried for sale to Africans as old hats, caps, salt, swords, knives, axe-heads, hammers, belts, sheepskin gloves, bracelets, iron jugs and even "cats to catch their mice." One African trader calling himself Grandy King George was quite specific in his demand. He wrote to a slave captain: "send me one lucking-glass, six foot long by six foot wide." He also asked for an armchair, a gold mounted cane and a stool." The more common imports were alcohol, guns and gunpowder , salt and textiles. The quality of the items shipped to Africa was inferior - the spirits were adulterated and the guns designed for the African market.
Africa's contemporary history may have been different had its rulers and traders demanded capital goods for use in building the economy rather than trinkets and booze. As it was, the slave trade arrested economic development in Africa. The loss in human resources had dire consequences for labour dependent agricultural economies. Any possibility that the internal dynamics of African society could have led to the development of capitalism and industrialisation was blocked by the slave trade. The few existing manufacturing activities were either destroyed or denied conditions for growth. Cheap European textiles, for instance, undermined local cloth production. Samuel Johnson wrote in the late nineteenth century about Yorubaland: "Before the period of intercourse with Europeans, all articles made of iron and steel, from weapons of war to pins and needles, were of home manufacture; but the cheaper and more finished articles of European make, especially cutlery, though less durable are fast displacing home-made wares." The predominance of the slave trade prevented the emergence of business classes that could have spearheaded the internal exploitation of the resources of their societies. The slave trade drew African societies into the international economy but as fodder for western economic development.
Africa devastated by slave trade wars
Inter-communal wars waged to procure slaves were intensely destructive of human lives. Tens of thousands of people were slaughtered in a single skirmish. The wars and rampant kidnappings fuelled hostility and suspicion between communities. Distrust was a basic requirement for individual and communal survival. The slave trade arrested and distorted the cultural development of African societies. It affected the meaning people gave to the world and their place within it. Increased uncertainty of life gave added force to superstitious beliefs and customs. People sought salvation and protection from the spiritual world. They paid homage to gods to safeguard themselves and their families from misfortune. The psychological impact of the dehumanising trade was crippling. There was constant anxiety caused by perpetual fear of being captured and herded away like common animals to a place of no return. Some Africans believed that whites took slaves to eat them.
Whites assert racial superiority
It was during the slave trade and slavery that white people affirmed their superiority over blacks. It is not difficult to understand why white traders who bought black people for price of adulterated brandy and packed them onto slave ships like cattle could consider themselves to be superior. Though most were illiterate, crude and drunken, white slave traders were free men herding flocks of human cattle. As the centuries passed Europeans became more and more scornful of black people. By the nineteenth century various theories of black inferiority were developed and used to justify the colonisation of Africa. During the slave trade Africans came to believe themselves to be inferior. They lost confidence in themselves, their culture and their ability to development. The late Afro-American civil rights leader Martin Luther King's comment that few people realise the extent that slavery had "scarred the soul and wounded the spirit of the black man," holds true not only with respect to the descendants of the Africans who arrived in the New World but also the descendants of those left behind. "The backwardness of black Africa," said the late Senegalese president Leopold Senghor, "...has been caused less by colonialism than by the Slave Trade."
Would the history of Africa have been turned out differently had it's leaders taken the advice of eighteenth century French thinker Jean Jacques Rousseau. He said: "If I were chief of one of the African peoples, I declare that I would have a gallows set up at the frontier, on which I would hang, without mercy, the first European who dared enter the country, and the first citizen who tried to leave it." Perhaps if more African rulers had militarily resisted the design of the better armed Europeans their peoples might have paid a bloody price, as did the Indians in the Americas who fought to keep their lands and expel the white intruders. Before Columbus arrived in Hispanoila in 1492, the native population of North America was perhaps 40 million. By 1900, in the U.S. less than quarter of a million remained, scattered among 1,500 remote reservations.
Africa's underdevelopment was not inevitable
Would Africans have suffered the same genocide had they tried to end the slave trade? Unlikely. It is doubtful that the human cost of resistance would have been greater than the many millions of Africans killed in slave producing wars as well as those eaten by sharks after being jettisoned during the Atlantic crossings. We cannot know for certain. It seems more likely that Europe would have had to look elsewhere for cheap labour. It was one thing for European nations to use military might to protect their coastal trading posts and subdue disgruntled local chiefs, it would have been an entirely different matter for them to penetrate the interior of the continent and fight the hundreds of war that fed the slave trade.
The cost of such ventures would have made the price of slaves unattractive to the plantation owners in the Americas. As the historian Philip Curtin noted " If the prices of African-born slaves had not been competitive with those of labour from other sources - native born or European - the slave trade could never have come into existence, no matter what the epidemiological consequences of movement across the Atlantic."
Had cheap Africans not been available to work the land and mines of the 'New World', white planters and landowners would have sought other sources of cheap labour. They would have made more use of the native population and also turned more to Europe for labour. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries large numbers of poor whites were shipped to the 'New World', most involuntarily, to work on plantations, mines and as servants. Some poor whites kidnapped on European streets were sold in the West Indies much in the same way as Africans were. Indentured servants, convicts and deportees from Europe were often treated not much better than black slaves. But as the transatlantic slave trade boomed, the number of whites in forced labour decreased. It was because of the relative cheapness of African slave labour, and therefore the plantation owners' preference for them, that the trade in white labour ended. This gave rise to what Afro-American writer William DuBois described as the replacement of "a caste of condition by a caste of race." Had the costs of black slaves been much dearer, Europe might have become a major source of unfree labour

Defend Libya Against Imperialist Attack

Defend Libya Against Imperialist Attack!

The International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist) calls on workers around the world to take a stand for military defense of semicolonial Libya against the attack begun yesterday by a coalition of rapacious imperialist governments. The French, British and U.S. rulers, in league with other imperialist governments and with the blessings of the sheiks, kings and military bonapartists of the Arab League, wasted not a moment in acting on the green light given by the United Nations Security Council on Thursday to slaughter countless innocent people in the name of “protecting civilians” and ensuring “democracy.” French air strikes were quickly followed by U.S. and British missile attacks, while Egypt’s military regime is providing arms to the Benghazi opposition forces. From Indochina and the Korean peninsula to the U.S.-led occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan today, the “democratic” imperialist rulers wade in the blood of millions upon millions of their victims. Recall that Britain and France historically carried out untold massacres in the Near East, Africa and the Indian subcontinent in order to pursue their colonial subjugation of those areas. Recall that Italy, now providing the use of its air bases for the attack, is responsible for the deaths of up to half the population of Cyrenaica in eastern Libya during its colonial rule prior to World War II.

Prior to the current attack, the conflict in Libya had taken the form of a low-intensity civil war, heavily overlaid by tribal and regional divisions, between the Tripoli-centered government of strongman Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi and imperialist-backed opposition forces concentrated in the country’s eastern areas. Workers Vanguard No. 976 (18 March), newspaper of the U.S. section of the ICL, noted that “Marxists presently have no side in this conflict.” But as the article continued: “In the event of imperialist attack against neocolonial Libya, the proletariat internationally must stand for the military defense of that country while giving no political support to Qaddafi’s capitalist regime.” The civil war in Libya has now been subordinated to the fight of a neocolonial country against imperialism. Every step taken by the workers of the imperialist countries to halt the depredations and military adventures of their rulers is a step toward their own liberation from capitalist exploitation, impoverishment and oppression. Defend Libya against imperialist attack! U.S. Fifth Fleet and all imperialist military bases and troops out of North Africa and the Near East!

Recall that the slaughter of well over a million people in Iraq began with the imposition of a UN-sponsored starvation embargo and a “no fly zone” in the 1990s. The latest action by the Security Council, including the neo-apartheid South African regime led by the African National Congress, underscores yet again the character of the United Nations as a den of imperialist thieves and their lackeys and semicolonial victims. The abstention by the representative of China, a bureaucratically deformed workers state, gave tacit approval to imperialist depredation, emboldening the very forces which seek to overturn the 1949 Chinese Revolution.

The crocodile tears shed by the imperialist rulers and their media mouthpieces over the Libyans killed by the Qaddafi regime during the recent wave of protests stands in sharp contrast to their muted response to the continuing massacre of protesters in Yemen—whose dictatorship is a key component of Washington’s “war on terror”—and their ongoing support to the Bahraini kingdom, which hosts the headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet. To aid in crushing mass protests, Bahrain last week invited in troops from the medievalist and theocratic Saudi monarchy, a key bulwark of U.S. imperialist interests in the region. In the eyes of the imperialist rulers, Bahrain’s Shi’ite majority and the Yemeni masses are less than human, with no rights they are bound to respect.

Numerous social-democratic leftists, typified by the United Secretariat (USec) and the British Cliffite Socialist Workers Party, have done their part to prepare the ground for imperialist massacres in Libya by cheering on the so-called “Libyan Revolution.” Having urged support for the cabal of pro-imperialist “democrats,” CIA stooges, monarchists and Islamists that comprise the Benghazi-based opposition, these reformists now feign to balk at imperialist military intervention in support of the opposition. The New Anti-Capitalist Party, constituted in 2009 by the USec’s French section, signed a call for a demonstration yesterday demanding that the Benghazi outfit be recognized as “the only legitimate representative of the Libyan people”—which French ruler Sarkozy had already done! At the same time, those left groups that have promoted illusions in Qaddafi’s “anti-imperialist” pretensions—such as the Workers World Party in the U.S.—seek everywhere and at all times to chain the working class to a mythical “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie.

We pledge today, as we did at the time of the U.S. Reagan administration’s bombing of Libya in 1986, to “undertake every effort to propagandize the need for the world working class to take the side of Libya” against its imperialist enemies (“Under Reagan’s Guns in Libya,” WV No. 401, 11 April 1986). In the pursuit of profit and domination, the same capitalist ruling classes that brutally exploit the working class “at home,” only to throw workers on the scrap heap during periods of economic crisis, as today, carry out murderous imperialist attacks abroad. The struggle against imperialist war cannot be conducted separately and apart from the class struggle. Only socialist revolution can overthrow the system of capitalist imperialism which breeds war. Our path is that of the October Revolution of 1917, led by the Bolshevik Party of Lenin and Trotsky, which was a beacon of revolutionary internationalism for the proletariat everywhere. We struggle to reforge the Fourth International as an instrument that can lead the working masses, from the Near East to the imperialist centers, forward to new October Revolutions and a world socialist society.

MAPACHA WATATU MSIJE KUWA NDUMILA KUWILI KAMA WALIOWATUNGULIA KUZIKIMBIA BENDI ZAO

MAPACHA WATATU: Haturudi nyuma kamwe

Send to a friend

Saturday, 30 April 2011 20:37

0diggsdigg Na Furaha Maugo NI kundi linalofanya vizuri katika medani ya muziki wa dansi hapa nchini kwa sasa, linaundwa na vijana watatu ambao hawajazaliwa na baba wala mama mmoja, lakini bado wanajiita mapacha watatu. Wakali hao ambao awali kabla ya kuunda kundi hilo, walikuwa katika bendi mbili tofauti za muziki wa dansi hapa nchini, hivi sasa wamekuwa gumzo katika anga la starehe na hasa muziki wa dansi. Uwezo wao pia umedhihirika baada ya kujinyakulia tuzo ya wimbo bora wa Kiswahili wa mwaka katika tuzo za kili Music Awards 2010/11, ikiwa ni muda mfupi tu tangu kuanzishwa kwa kundi hilo na kuyabwaga makundi nguli wa muziki wa dansi kama Extra Bongo, Twanga Pepeta na Akudo Impact. Awali kundi hili lilikuwa likiwatumikia mabwana wawili kwa wakati mmoja; walikuwa wakiimba katika bendi zao na pia kulitumikia kundi lao ambapo Josee Mara alikuwa kundi la FM Academia, na Chokoraa na Kalala Jr walikuwa Twanga Pepeta. Lakini ndoa hiyo iliwashinda na kuamua kuachana na bendi zao, ni hivi karibuni, Meneja wa wakali hao, Hamis Dakota amesema kuwa wanamuziki wake hawafikirii kurudi nyuma tena. Dakota alisema kundi lake limejipanga vizuri kuhakikisha wanakabilia na soko la ushindani lililopo sasa na wanaamini watafanya vizuri kwa sababu imezungukwa na vichwa vikali katika tasnia ya muziki wa dansi. “Kiukweli sasa hivi tunataka mabadiliko ikiwa ni pamoja na kuwa na  nyumba nzuri ya kuishi na maisha mazuri na haya yote yataletwa ikiwa tutafanya  kazi kwa juhudi na maarifa kila kukicha kwa ubunifu wa hali ya juu” anasema Dakota.  “Mashabiki wakao mkao wa kula kwani tayari albamu ya pili yenye  jumla ya nyumba sita  imeshakamilika japokuwa hatujaipa jina rasmi ” anaongeza kusema Meneja Dakota. Baadhi ya nyimbo zitakazokuwepo katika Albamu hiyo ni pamoja na Mjasiriamali iliyoimbwa na kutungwa na Chokoraa, Usia wa babu ya  Josee Mara, Mtoto wa Paka ya  Kalala junior, Sumu ya mapenzi remix ya Kalala Jr na Gari bovu ulioimbwa na kutungwa na mpiga vyombo Arosto Mashama . Mapacha watatu walifikia uamuzi wa kuunda kundi lao mwaka 2010, vijana hao ambao wamekulia katika muziki na wamepitia bendi kubwa hapa nchini, haikuwapa shida kuwateka mashabiki wa muziki wa dansi kwani tayari walikuwa wakipendwa hata huko walipokuwa kabla ya kuunda kundi lao wenyewe. Baada ya kuunda kundi la Mapacha Watatu, waliendelea kufanya shughuli zao kote kote, wakiimba na kufanya maonesho mbalimbali wakiwa na bendi zao (Twanga na FM Academia), huku pia wakilazimika kutumia nguvu zaidi kufanya maonyesho ya bendi yao. Baada ya muda mfupi walifanikiwa kuachia Albamu yao ya kwanza iliyopewa jina la ‘Jasho la Mtu’ na ilikuwa na nyimbo kama ‘Shika ushikapo’, ‘Kipaji Changu’ na ‘Muhudumu’ wimbo ulio na mahadhi ya Afrika Magharibi (Gauo) ziliweza kufanya vizuri . Ni kutokana na umahiri wao katika muziki wa dansi, wimbo wa ‘Shika Ishikapo’ uliweza kupendwa na hadi kuchaguliwa kuwa wimbo bora wa Kiswahili kwa mwaka 2010/11 katika tuzo za muziki za Kili, huku Khalid Chokoraa akishinda tuzo ya Rapa bora wa Kiume wa mwaka 2010/11 katika tuzo hizo.

KWANINI WATANZANIA WASINUFAIKE NA UTAJIRI WA MADINI WALIOPEWA NA MUNGU?

Hoja Binafsi ya kuunda kamati teule ya Bunge kuchunguza mkataba mpya wa madini ambao Waziri wa Nishati na Madini Karamagi ameusaini bila kuzingatia ma

Mheshimiwa Zitto Zuberi Kabwe (Mb) Kigoma Kaskazini

MHESHIMIWA Spika, kwanza napenda kutoa shukrani zangu za dhati kwa kunipatia fursa ya kuleta hoja hii hapa kwenye Bunge lako tukufu kwa mujibu wa kanuni zetu za Bunge. Kuletwa kwa hoja hii, bila kujali maamuzi ya kuhusu hoja yenyewe, ni ishara tosha ya ukomavu wa demokrasia yetu ambayo inakuzwa na mijadala ya Bunge lako tukufu. Nakupongeza kwa dhati kabisa kwa juhudi zako za kuliimarisha Bunge letu na kujenga muhimili imara wa ulinzi wa demokrasia ya vyama vingi nchini kwetu.
Mheshimiwa Spika, mnamo tarehe 16/7/2007 mara baada ya hoja ya Waziri wa Nishati na Madini kuamuliwa na Bunge lako tukufu, nilisimama mahala pangu na kutoa taarifa ya kukusudia kuleta hoja ya kuunda kamati teule ya Bunge. Nilisema kama ifuatavyo (kwa mujibu wa kumbukumbu sahihi za mijadala ya Bunge), ninanukuu ‘…naomba kutoa taarifa rasmi… kwamba nakusudia kuleta hoja ya kuunda kamati teule kuchunguza mkataba mpya wa madini ambao Waziri wa Nishati na Madini ameusaini bila kuzingatia maagizo ya rais (wa Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania) ya kupitia mikataba ya madini aliyoyatoa mbele ya Bunge lako tukufu tarehe 30 Disemba, 2005.’ Mwisho wa kunukuu.
Mheshimiwa Spika, nimeshawasilisha hoja yangu hii kwa maandishi kwa Katibu wa Bunge na sasa nawasilisha rasmi katika kikao hiki cha Bunge kwa uamuzi. Nimezingatia kanuni 104 (2) katika kuwasilisha hoja yangu.
Mheshimiwa Spika, katika maelezo yangu niliyowasilisha bungeni wakati wa mjadala wa hotuba ya Waziri wa Nishati na Madini siku ya tarehe 16/7/2007, nilihitaji maelezo kutoka serikalini katika masuala makuu mawili yafuatayo:

1. Kuondolewa kwa kipengele katika sheria ya kodi ya mapato ya mwaka 1973 kuhusiana na asilimia 15% ya ‘capital allowance on unredeemed qualifying capital expenditure’ bila ya kibali cha Bunge lako tukufu.
2. Kusainiwa kwa mkataba mpya wa madini wa mgodi (mradi) wa Buzwagi kati ya serikali na Kampuni ya Barrick na sababu za mkataba huo kusainiwa nje ya nchi, London, Uingereza, na vilevile kwa nini mkataba huo umesainiwa wakati bado serikali inafanya durusu (review) ya mikataba kufuatana na maagizo ya Rais wa Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania ndugu Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete.

Mheshimiwa Spika, wakati akijibu hoja zangu Waziri wa Nishati na Madini alijenga hoja zake kama ifuatavyo:

A. Kuhusiana na asilimia 15% ya ‘capital allowance on unredeemed qualifying capital expenditure’

Mheshimiwa Spika, Mheshimiwa Waziri wa Nishati na Madini amenukuliwa na kumbukumbu za majadiliano ya Bunge akisema, ninanukuu: “…kwa hiyo pamoja na kwamba ninamheshimu sana Mheshimiwa Kabwe Zitto na sote tunamheshimu ni msomaji mzuri, lakini wakati mwingine lazima kuangalia vitu gani unasoma. Ni kwamba kipengele hiki cha sheria kililetwa hapa bungeni mwaka 2001 kwenye bajeti kikabadilishwa…” Mwisho wa kunukuu.
Mheshimiwa Spika, katika kuandaa hoja yangu hii, ilinibidi kupitia upya kumbukumbu za majadiliano ya Bunge ili kujiridhisha na maelezo ya Mheshimiwa Waziri wa Nishati na Madini, maelezo ambayo mimi nililitaarifu Bunge lako tukufu tarehe 16/7/2007 kuwa sio sahihi.
Mheshimiwa Spika, Kumbukumbu hizo zinaonesha kwamba, sheria ya fedha ya mwaka 2001 (Finance Act. No.14 ya 2001) ilifanyiwa marekebisho kadhaa ikiwemo marekebisho ya sheria ya madini kifungu cha 87 ambapo kifungu kidogo cha (3) cha kifungu cha 87 kiliongezwa. Kifungu kidogo hicho kinasema, ninanukuu:
‘(3) The provisions of subsections (1) and (2) shall not apply to any person who, immediately before the first day of July, 2001 was not the holder of a mineral right granted under this Act.’
Mheshimiwa Spika, kifungu cha 87 cha Sheria ya Madini ya mwaka 1998 (No.5/1998) kinazungumzia mrahaba wa madini (Remission and deferment of royalties). Hivyo, kama sheria ya fedha ya mwaka 2001 haikubadili kipenge hiki, Mheshimiwa Waziri ametoa wapi jibu aliloliambia Bunge?
Mheshimiwa Spika, suala hili linahusu haki, kinga na madaraka ya Bunge kwa mujibu wa sheria namba 3 ya 1988.
Mheshimiwa Spika, hata hivyo katika hotuba ya Waziri wa Fedha, Mheshimiwa Basil Mramba, akiwasilisha hotuba ya Bajeti mwaka 2002, tarehe 13 mwezi Juni, alizungumzia kipengele hiki. Ninaomba kunukuu sehemu ya hotuba ya Waziri wa Fedha, Mhe. Basili Mramba.
“Amendment to the Income Tax structure, (44) Mr. Speaker, in this area I propose to take the following measures:
(v) I propose to reinstate the additional 15 percent capital allowance on unredeemed qualifying capital expenditure as set out in the Mining Act. No. 5 of 1998.” Mwisho wa kunukuu.
Mheshimiwa Spika, nilipopitia sheria ya fedha ya mwaka 2002, nimekuta sehemu ya 8 inazungumzia mabadiliko katika kodi ya mapato ya 1973. Na hata katika ukurasa wa kwanza wa sheria hii (Arrangement of Contents), sheria ya madini haitajwi.
Mheshimiwa Spika, maelezo haya ya Waziri wa Fedha ya mwaka 2002 yanaonesha dhahiri utata wa kipengele hiki. Ni kwa vipi kifungu cha sheria ambacho hakijafutwa kirejeshwe?
Mheshimiwa Spika, tuchukulie kuwa maneno ya waziri ni ya kweli. Je, kwa nini makampuni ya madini ambayo yameingia mkataba na serikali kuanzia Julai mosi 2001 hayajaanza kulipa kodi ya mapato?
Mheshimiwa Spika, utata huu ambao umegubika sekta hii ya madini, unaweza kufafanuliwa na Bunge lako tukufu kupitia Kamati Teule. Kamati Teule ya Bunge ichunguze upitiaji wa mikataba hii na kuona kama kuna vitendo vyovyote vya uvunjifu wa sheria za nchi na kupotea kwa mapato ya serikali na ufisadi.

B. Kusainiwa kwa Mkataba wa Mgodi (Mradi) wa Buzwagi.

Mheshimiwa Spika, wakati akijibu hoja yangu kuhusiana na suala la mkataba mpya wa mgodi wa Buzwagi, Waziri wa Nishati na Madini amenukuliwa na kumbukumbu za majadiliano ya Bunge akisema kama ifuatavyo:
Mheshimiwa Spika, katika tathmini ya migodi, mgodi wa Buzwagi ni marginal mine ambao uhai wake si wa muda mrefu. Bila ya kutumia fursa ya sasa ya bei ya dhahabu, uwekezaji wake usingeweza kuwa wa faida. Hata hivyo, mkataba wa Buzwagi hauna mapungufu yaliyokuwamo kwenye mikataba ya zamani.’ Mwisho wa kunukuu.
Mheshimiwa Spika, mapitio ya mikataba ya madini ni mchakato ambao mwisho wake ni kuletwa kwa sheria ya madini hapa bungeni na kuifanyia marekebisho ili kuiboresha na kuondoa mapungufu. Hivyo, mpaka hapo sheria itakaporekebishwa, ndipo tutasema tumemaliza zoezi la kupitia mikataba ya madini na hivyo kusaini mikataba mipya na makampuni yote ya madini yaliyopo nchini na yatakayokuja kuwekeza.
Mheshimiwa Spika, suala ambalo linanipelekea kuomba kuundwa kwa Kamati Teule ya Bunge kuchunguza mkataba huu mpya, ni kuhusu uharaka uliopelekea Waziri wa Nishati na Madini kusaini mkataba huu. Sheria ya Madini bado haijarekebishwa, je, waziri anatumia vigezo gani kusema mkataba mpya wa Buzwagi aliousaini London hauna mapungufu?
Mheshimiwa Spika, Waziri wa Nishati na Madini aliliambia Bunge lako tukufu kuwa Buzwagi ni marginal mine. Vile vile waziri anasema kuwa Kampuni ya Barrick inamiliki migodi mitatu tu kupitia kampuni zake tanzu ambazo ni Bulyanhulu Gold Mine, North Mara Gold Mine na Pangea Minerals Limited Tulawaka. Kwa maelezo haya ya Waziri Karamagi, Buzwagi sio mgodi.
Mheshimiwa Spika, hoja hii ya kuwa Buzwagi sio mgodi inashabihiana kabisa na hoja ya Kampuni ya Barrick kwamba Buzwagi ni Project. Taarifa ya kampuni hii ya Barrick Gold Corporation-Global operations-Africa- Buzwagi, inaonesha kuwa Buzwagi ni mradi. Taarifa hii ninaiambatanisha katika hoja hii.
Mheshimiwa Spika, taarifa ya Barrick, Annual Review 2006 inasema ifuatavyo katika ukurasa wa 23, ninanukuu. ‘A major milestone was reached in February 2007 when we signed a mineral Development Agreement (MDA) with the Tanzanian government. In 2007, we expect to complete a detailed construction design and receive EIA approval.’
Mheshimiwa Spika, suala ambalo vile vile linanisukuma kuomba Bunge lako tukufu kuunda Kamati Teule ni kwamba, iwapo Buzwagi sio mgodi bali ni mradi, ni kwa nini tumesaini Mineral Development Agreement (MDA) mpya? Kwa kuwa Pangea Minerals Tulawaka ndio inaonekana kumiliki mradi huu, je, serikali imefanya marekebisho tu ya MDA na Kampuni ya Barrick? Naomba Kamati Teule ichunguze ni nini kilichosainiwa, marekebisho ya mkataba wa Tulawaka au MDA mpya ya Buzwagi?
Mheshimiwa Spika, Buzwagi inashika nafasi ya pili kwa uwekezaji wa Barrick katika migodi hapa nchini. Wakati kampuni hii inawekeza dola za Kimarekani 400 milioni katika Buzwagi, imewekeza dola za Kimarekani 600 katika Bulyanhulu. Je, ni kwa vipi Buzwagi iwe marginal mine wakati uwekezaji wake unashinda uwekezaji wa Tulawaka na North Mara?
Mheshimiwa Spika, chini ya kifungu cha 47 cha Sheria ya Madini ya Mwaka 1998 (Na.5/98), pamoja na mambo mengine kinataka leseni yoyote isitolewe mpaka taarifa ya mazingira iwe imetolewa na kuruhusu mgodi kuendelea na kazi.
Mheshimiwa Spika, wakati Waziri wa Nishati na Madini ameweka saini mkataba wa Buzwagi juma la mwisho la mwezi Februari 2007, Baraza la Mazingira nchini limetoa kibali (Environmental Impact Assessment- EIA approval) tarehe 11 mwezi Mei 2007. Ni kwa nini Waziri wa Nishati na Madini, Mheshimiwa Nazir Karamagi alisaini MDA ya Buzwagi na Kampuni ya Barrick kabla Baraza la Mazingira la Taifa (NEMC) halijatoa ruhusa?
Mheshimiwa Spika, sheria ya madini, niliyoitaja hapo awali, imeunda Kamati ya Ushauri ya Madini (Mining advisory Committee). Kabla ya waziri kusaini mkataba wowote ni lazima apate ushauri kutoka kamati hii. Kwa taratibu za kiserikali, kama kamati ikimshauri waziri na waziri akakataa ushauri huo, inampasa waziri atoe sababu ni kwa nini anakataa ushauri. Je, waziri alifuata ushauri wa Kamati ya Ushauri ya Madini kuhusiana na wakati mwafaka wa kusaini mkataba huu?
Mheshimiwa Spika, inawezekana kabisa MDA ya Buzwagi kusainiwa Uingereza sio tatizo. Kwa mfano, mwaka 2006 Serikali ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania ilisaini mikataba kadhaa. Ni mingapi kati ya mikataba hii imesainiwa nje ya nchi? Nini madhara ya kisheria kwa mkataba kusaniwa Uingereza? Je, mkataba umeandikwa “signed in London...” au “signed in Dar es Salaam...? Kamati Teule ya Bunge ndio chombo pekee kitakachoweza kutoa majibu ya maswali haya.
Mheshimiwa Spika, suala hili ni suala la kitaifa. Halina hata chembe ya itikadi za kivyama. Ninaamini wabunge wataamua kwa maslahi ya taifa letu. Uundwaji wa Kamati Teule ya Bunge kuchunguza mapitio ya mikataba ya madini na mazingira ya kusainiwa kwa mkataba mpya wa Buzwagi yatatoa msaada mkubwa kwa azma ya Rais wetu ndugu Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete ya kuona rasilimali za madini zinafaidisha nchi yetu.
Mheshimiwa Spika, ninaomba kutoa hoja

MIKOA MIPYA ITAANZISHWAJE BILA KUWEKWA KWENYE BAJETI,AU NI SIASA TUPU?

Bajeti ijayo haiitambui mikoa mipya

Send to a friend

Sunday, 05 June 2011 21:34

0diggsdigg Waziri wa Fedha na Uchumi, Mustafa Mkulo Boniface Meena BAJETI inayotarajiwa kusomwa bungeni Juni 8, mwaka huu inaonyesha kuwa mikoa mipya iliyoanzishwa haijatengewa fedha za kuiendesha kwa mwaka wa fedha ujao. Mikoa hiyo mipya ni Njombe, Simiyu na Geita ambayo kusudio la kuanzishwa kwake lilitangazwa bungeni mjini Dodoma mwaka jana na Waziri Mkuu, Mizengo Pinda alipokuwa akihitimisha Hotuba ya Makadirio ya Bajeti kwa ofisi yake. Kwa mujibu wa mapendekezo yaliyowasilishwa katika Kamati ya Bunge ya Katiba Sheria na Utawala, mikoa iliyotajwa katika Bajeti ya Tawala za Mikoa na Serikali za Mitaa (Tamisemi), mikoa iliyotengewa mafungu ni 21 tu. Kati ya mikoa hiyo, Dar es Salaam unaongoza kwa kuwa na bajeti kubwa ya Sh 213.8 bilioni huku Lindi ukishika mkia kwa kuwa na bajeti ndogo ya Sh 56.0 bilioni.Mbali ya Dar es Salaam mingine iliyotengewa fedha nyingi ni Mwanza (Sh175.6 bilioni), Mbeya (Sh163.4 bilioni), Shinyanga (Sh141.3 bilioni) na Kilimanjaro wenye Sh138.0 bilioni. Mikoa inayoungana na Lindi kwa kutengewa bajeti ndogo ni Rukwa Sh63.9 bilioni, Singida Sh63.8 bilioni, Mtwara Sh78.2 bilioni na Kigoma Sh72.3 bilioni. Bajeti kwa mikoa yote hiyo 21 ya Tanzania Bara ni kiasi cha Sh2.3 trilioni. Waziri wa Fedha na Uchumi, Mustafa Mkulo alipoulizwa kuhusu suala la mikoa hiyo mipya kutotengewa bajeti alisema kuwa waziri anayeweza kuzungumzia suala hilo ni George Mkuchika wa (Tamisemi): "Mwulize Mkuchinka ndiye waziri ambaye ataweza kukueleza kuhusu hilo." hata hivyo, jitihada za kumpata Mkuchika kutoa ufafanuzi zilikwama.Kamati ya Bunge ilipitisha mapendekezo ya bajeti hiyo ya Tamisemi na kuitaka kutoa kipaumbele katika miradi ya maendeleo kwenye halmashauri zote nchini. Mkuchika aliiambia kamati hiyo kuwa kati ya fedha hizo, Sh2.3 trilioni zitatumika kwa ajili ya matumizi ya kawaida na zilizobaki zitatumika kulipa mishahara watumishi wake.Alisema kutokana na hali hiyo halmashauri nchini zitasimamia miradi yake na kuongeza mapato ambayo yatatumika kwenye shughuli mbalimbali za maendeleo. MIKOA MIPYA ILIYOANZISHWA (i) Mkoa wa Njombe. Huu umezaliwa baada ya kumegwa na kuunganishwa kwa Wilaya za Njombe, Ludewa na Makete kutoka Mkoa wa Iringa. Mkoa huu utakuwa na wilaya mpya ya Wanging’ombe ambayo inatokana na kugawanywa kwa Wilaya ya Njombe. (ii) Mkoa wa Geita. Huu unatokana na kumega na kuunganisha Wilaya za Geita kutoka Mkoa wa Mwanza, Bukombe kutoka Mkoa wa Shinyanga na Chato kutoka Mkoa wa Kagera. Mkoa huu utakuwa na Wilaya mpya ya Nyang’hwale ambayo inatokana na kugawanywa kwa Wilaya ya Geita. (iii) Mkoa wa Simiyu. Unatokana na kumega na kuunganisha Wilaya za Bariadi kutoka Mkoa wa Shinyanga, Maswa kutoka Mkoa wa Shinyanga, Meatu kutoka Mkoa wa Shinyanga na Wilaya mpya ya Busega kutoka Mkoa wa Mwanza. Mkoa huu utakuwa na Wilaya nyingine mpya ya Itilima ambayo inatokana na kugawanywa kwa Wilaya ya Bariadi. MADHUMUNI YA KUANZISHWA MIKOA MIPYA Katiba ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania inaelekeza kuwa, kwa ajili ya utekelezaji bora wa shughuli za Serikali, Rais anaweza kuigawa nchi katika mikoa au Wwlaya. Hivyo, madhumuni ya kuanzishwa kwa mikoa hiyo ni kuboresha utendaji wa serikali kuu kwa kupunguza ukubwa wa maeneo ya mikoa mama ili wananchi wapate huduma za kiutawala ngazi ya mikoa kwa karibu.

CALL FOR ACTION-CHADEMA

The Arrest of The Leader of Official Opposition in Tanzania, Hon. Freeman Mbowe (Mb) is infringement of freedom of Parliament and a threat to democracy in the country

CALL FOR ACTION

This is to bring to your urgent attention that the Leader of Official Opposition in Tanzania Parliament, Hon. Freeman Mbowe (Mp) who is also the National Party Leader (Chairman) of CHADEMA, the main opposition party in the country has been arrested today (4th June 2011) and is being held in custody at the Central Police Station in Dar es Salaam.
He has been arrested during the ongoing Parliamentary Committee sessions that he is attending as prelude to the fourth Parliamentary Session that is scheduled to commence on 7th June 2011.
He has been arrested by the Police by the order of Resident Magistrate's court which is tantamount to infringement of freedom of Parliament and a threat to democracy in the country. This is very unfortunate as the arrest comes against Court order which had exempted the MP’s from attending court sessions which are at mention stage at Arusha. The Court also made order to issue “notice to show cause” to sureties, but  court records do not indicate that the said notice to sureties had matterally  been issued. It is clear therefore that the said arrest is a result of a master plan of the rulling Party CCM whose Chairman is also the President of the United Republic of Tanzania. The arrest  clearly will destabilize the preparation of the Opposition Budget Speech.
The arrest is unlawful and unconstitutional as it contravenes the statutes in the Union Constitution and Commonwealth National Parliament customs and traditions, which accord lawmakers’ immunity whenever they are engaged in Parliamentary business.
Members of Parliament according To Parliamentary Immunities, Powers and Privilleges Act, 1988 may not be arrested during parliamentary sessions without Speaker’s authorization as per stipulations set forth in sections 5, 6 and 11 of the said Act.
Also article 100 of the Union Constitution of 1977 recognizes and defends freedom of expression, discussions, and parliamentary procedures and that such freedom will not be broken or questioned by any organ of the union government or in any court or anywhere outside the parliament.
We further call to your attention that there has been an ongoing trend of the police force in Tanzania arresting, beating and harassing opposition legislators . This is now becoming a pattern.
The list of CHADEMA Members of Parliament recently arrested and released on bail include Hon. Philemon Ndesamburo, Joseph Selasin, Godbless Lema, Hon. Meshack Opulukwa, Hon. Tundu Lissu (Chief Whip), Hon. Esther Matiko and a CUF legislator Hon. Magdalena Sakaya who is to date in custody. Hon Lissu was arrested, beaten and harassed while on official tour as Shadow Minister for Home Affairs.
However Incase of the ruling party, CCM MPs-some of whom with greater charges; Speaker’s permission is sought as evidenced by the Letter dated May 31 letter from Mwanza Special Police Investigator (SP) B.M. Wakulyamba asking the Speaker to authorise the questioning of CCM’s Busega MP, Titus Kamani in connection with an alleged plot to murder former Busega MP Dr Raphael Chegeni. The treatment of Opposition Parties is a double standard.
On 3rd June 2011 Mr Mbowe had told the press that he has been shocked by the arrest warrant issued in the pre text of court contempt since both him and the party has the record of respecting the court. Mr Mbowe explained that recognizing the role of the opposition in the budgetary proceedings that are ongoing the accused legislators agreed with the Resident Magistrate that they will appear in Court after the Budget sessions.
We ask for your support to call for his immediate release and condemn the actions of state machinery against the opposition legislators, leaders and democracy.
Issued by:

John Mnyika (Mp)

Secretary of Official Opposition
And Director of Foreign Affairs (CHADEMA)
+255-784-222 222