Gadaffi, a not so Greek tragedy.

Kampala, Uganda-  Greek tragedy is something I admittedly have minimal knowledge of, however the one recurrent theme I have picked up in my spasmodic interaction with this form of literature is this, our paths to greatness can be undone by  the interaction between external circumstances and our character flaws.

In the days, weeks and months leading up to the death of Muammar Gadaffi of Libya I can’t help but wonder if his life and times would not have made a great Greek tragedy novel.  The protagonist, full of noble intentions who through a great deal of blood, sweat and tears undertakes Sisyphean labor until he is undone by a character flaw. His path to greatness is blocked by a character flaw and therein is the tragedy.

Like the Persian King Xerxes whose invasion of Greece was ultimately undone by his hubris, Gadaffi may have ultimately been undone by a messianic hubris that did not allow him to see that the ideas he espoused were less relevant in the world today.  A hubris that did not allow him to see that he had become politically isolated, his key allies being Sub Saharan African countries with limited political clout on the international scene. A hubris that did not allow him to see that he had become the very thing he loathed, a man in command of a pseudo monarchy not unlike the one he overthrew.

Like a modern day Okwonkwo the main protagonist in timeless classic Things Fall Apart, mercilessly driven by the demons of his past to the highest station in life, only to be held hostage by them. In the end coming undone by the same resolve that had served him so well in his rise to the top.

In the days leading up to and the days after the death of Gadaffi, the media has been inundated with literally hundreds of analyses all assigning the blame for the fall of Gadaffi to a single cause, oil. I believe without looking critically at the facts with respect to Gadaffi’s life and death the political class may lull themselves into a false sense of safety believing of they have no ‘strategic’ minerals, then they can run their countries as they see fit without fear of ‘imperialism’.

The Sad Bizarre End of a Revolutionary.

I make no bones about the fact that I think Gadaffi’s revolutionary credentials are suspect at best; I also disagree with the anti-imperialist argument because it  has very little resonance with my generation, I/we do not see the west and the ideas it espouses, key idea being a liberal, representative and accountable government as inherently hostile.

My second bone of contention with anti-imperialism is it completely relieves the leadership of any responsibility.  All our problems, all our failings can be and are blamed on external factors that we have no control over. No one asked Mobutu to sell out his country; he did it because it was the best way for him to keep power.

The last words on the life and times of Gadaffi have not been written but what if find most telling is this, in life he deposed a monarchy, a system built not on merit but on blood connections. Throughout his rule, the paths to the highest echelons of power were determined not by merit, but by blood and tribal affiliations to the ‘great leader’. His revolution can be seen as nothing more than a replacement of the Idriss monarchy with the Gadaffi monarchy. For the Libyan people, the rider changed, but they still remained donkeys to the vagaries of a single individual.

At the end of his life this ‘great revolutionary’, and ‘anti-imperialist’ he was defended not by his ‘national army’ but by a Special Forces unit.  Special in the sense that it was tasked with protecting the regime rather than the state, in this role it cannibalized and starved the wider army of valuable resources.

This unit was led by his son, staffed and manned by mercenaries and men from his tribe. The city in which he died was not the most cosmopolitan city in Libya, no, it was his birth place, choke full of fighters loyal not to the idea of Libya, but to him as a fellow kinsman.

The Irrelevance of the Oil argument.

Libya is blessed with forty billion barrels of oil, virtually all of it found in the desert making it easy and cheap to extract. Libyan oil is light sweet, low in sulphur, high in valuable distillates, and because of this Gadaffi was ousted because the west wanted access to his oil, yes his oil.

Let’s look at the facts; Libya’s national oil company has a whole host of relationships with western oil companies.  The EPSA’s negotiated by the national oil company grant access to these resources in some cases till 2047 so the issue of access to these resources is not supported by the evidence. http://www.eni.com/en_IT/eni-world/libya/eni-business/eni-business.shtml http://www.suncor.com/en/about/3986.aspxl.

While it is true that the terms imposed under these EPSA’s are some of the toughest across the Middle East, virtually all the companies accepted lower oil lifts for extended access to this oil. The lower lift matched against much longer access to the oil fields. Considering Libya’s field were practically virginal due to minimal exploitation, the terms negotiated under ESPA IV were reasonable. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wikileaks-files/libya-wikileaks/8294570/FRENCH-TOTAL-LED-CONSORTIUMS-ACCEPT-LOWER-PRODUCTION-SHARES-IN-LIBYA.html

Looking at this from another perspective, Oil contributes 95% of Libya’s export revenue; it also contributes 25% of the GDP and 80% of government revenue. With thirty percent youth unemployment, a heavy subsidy burden, a political system dependent upon patronage, Libya is a classic rentier state, completely dependent on oil; any designs which would affect this position would be political suicide.

Oil is a double edged weapon; it is in the interests if those who have it to do their very best to keep it affordable lest it be substituted. Adel al Jubeir former foreign policy advisor to the Saudi prince Abdullah and present Saudi Ambassador to the United States said of Saudi Arabia ‘We have almost thirty percent of the world’s oil. For us, the objective is to assure that oil remains and economically competitive source of energy. Oil prices that are too high reduce demand growth for oil and encourage the development of alternative sources of energy’. For oil rentier states the energy substitution effect would doom them to failure and political instability so anyone attempting to wield the oil weapon would have to have the dexterity of a bomb disposal expert lest it take him out too.

I come to Bury Gadaffi.

The manner of his death and the macabre display of his decomposing corpse are things I disagree with. Even though at a certain level I understand the desire to have a man who had so dominated life in Libya on display. I sympathize with those who called him father, grandfather, husband, uncle in the same breath my sympathies go out to all those who lost their lives as a result of his actions.

On a wider level Gadaffi’s death represents the end of an era, an era in which we as Africans live in pseudo monarchies dominated by the whims of a single individual. It represents the death of an era in which the political elite who run this continent can no longer sweep their failings under the rug that is imperialism and neocolonialism. For the elite, think long and hard about the lesson of Bouazzizi

Tullow Bribery Saga; Figures over facts, form over substance.

Preliminary musings.

There is an ancient Chinese curse that goes ‘May you live in interesting times’ Forget common usage of the term interesting, it can be translated to mean may trouble never leave your side. This week in Uganda, we lived out that statement, some people more than others.

This week opposition politicians dropped the equivalent of a daisy cutter.             http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-82. The allegations that three cabinet ministers had been offered carrots to the tune of twenty three million Euros by Tullow the international oil company for vague services granted, in short a bribe. The media picked up on the figures and run with them, creating a blast wave in which many of us, me included forgot the basic adage, never make important decisions based on first information.

Two of the three ministers were specifically named, Sam Kuteesa Minister of Foreign Affairs and Hillary Onek former minister of Energy, the Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi was named in passing. Kuteesa and Mbabazi are lighting rods, revered and reviled in almost equal measure. Kuteesa has been censured for corruption in the past; against this backdrop it is easy to see how these accusations seem believable.

International oil companies have a torrid reputation with respect to corruption. Furthermore, by virtue of the fact they deal with the government in power it is easy to see how they can be seen as willing allies of the ruling system which makes them an easy target.

Into this mix add the opaque negotiation process associated with Uganda's oil contracts and you have the perfect storm for a political lynching.

I will admit I was dumbfounded by the figures, in economic times when most of us have tightened our belts to the point where they have cut us in half; it beggars belief that there are individuals who may have money we can only dream of in pot induced flights of fancy.

And therein lies the problem, I was so taken up by the figures, stunned into flights of fancy of what those funds could do I did not stop to think that there is a possibility that there is no substance to these allegations. What if these allegations were false? What if the people making these allegations could have discovered the fallacy of their documentation with minimal investigation?

In this week’s edition of The Independent Magazine I had a chance to see reproductions of these documents and the more I read, the less convinced I was that there was truth in all this.

The Power of Attorney Documentation.

Tullow Oil is a limited liability company listed on the London stock exchange. According to information available in the public domain, 26.5% of this company is privately held by different entities the rest is owned by investors through the stock exchange. http://www.tullowoil.com/index.asp?pageid=104. The compliance standards for listed companies are very high, it does not mean they are not and cannot be breached; however, the consequences are normally enough to give one pause.

The first glaring hole that I see, if you ignore the atrocious grammar, is the powers were granted to PAY cash. It would logically consistent assuming Mr. Heavey was indisposed, for him to grant powers to Mr. Glover to DRAW cash against a cheque or any other instrument.

Moreover, addressing this document to the bank is a redundancy. Banks are primarily interested in the persons who DRAW cash; in this case there is no indication as to whether or not Mr. Glover has the power to draw cash. A more relevant document from a banks perspective would have allowed Mr. Glover to DRAW cash which does not seem to be the case here.

Also, I find it very hard to believe that a listed company would on the strength of a letter signed by a single individual transfer power of attorney. Dual control and succession planning are basic tenets of corporate governance, is Mr. Glover, Mr. Heaveys’ designated successor in the event Mr. Heavey is indisposed?  Aidan Heavey may have founded Tullow but I would be hard pressed to believe that he would turn around and run it like a local mom and pop shop in down town Kampala.

Assuming the document in The Independent is accurate; I do not see how it could have passed legal muster. In my experience with such documentation, the drafting is very specific. It would have at the very least identified Brian Glover and specified the duration for which the document had potency.

The third aspect that I find very suspicious is the overt use of the names of Sam Kahamba Kuteesa and his date of birth.  Reading points one and two above in combination, Bank of Valletta had no relationship with East African Development Limited and by extension Sam Kahamba Kuteesa as such it is completely unnecessary for him to be identified to Bank of Valletta.

In addition, a date of birth does not serve to identify anyone, even with entities that have a much lower profile than Tullow the proper positive identification of an agent is never taken for granted.  In my view, the date of birth especially if it is used in combination with other official documentation like a passport or driver’s license number (Banks have a preference for nationally issued ID) would have made the documentation less suspicious.

Tullow Oil operates in one of the most limiting environments with respect to corruption and bribery, the UK Anti-Bribery Act 2010 is easily one of the toughest laws on the books anywhere http://www.cliffordchance.com/publicationviews/publications/2011/03/the_uk_bribery_act2010anendtomixin.html.

Aidan Heavey and the Tullow are aware of the game changing nature of this legislation and have been aware for at least a year. Why would he, assuming he was interested in corrupting the system leave breadcrumbs that could be directly linked to him? An in-depth look at the aforementioned analysis would give you pause or convince you that Tullow is being run by a bunch of mad men. This new law takes no hostages.

Funds Transfer in the Post 9/11 World.

Banking generally speaking is a web, a myriad of interconnected interests. International funds transfer is primarily done through a system called Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT). There is no limit to the amount of funds that can be transferred though it follows, that certain funds attract far more attention than others. In the aftermath of 9/11 as part of the war against terror SWIFT has been cooperating with international intelligence agencies, handing over their transaction database for scrutiny. http://articles.technology.findlaw.com/2006/Jul/18/10162.html. I can categorically state it is impossible to wire ten thousand US dollars or its equivalent without it being flagged. The funds in question could not have been moved without there being an electronic trail.

Bank of Valletta it is the second largest financial institution in Malta with impressive financial figures, in short they are a credible institution with plenty to lose if they engaged in nefarious activity. What's more Bank of Valletta has been certified by the US government with respect to compliance with the relevant provisions of the PATRIOT act relating to foreign banks.

Suspicious transaction monitoring is considered business as usual in all banks, any funds received outside normal account activity would immediately be flagged and the beneficiary would have to provide documentary evidence to support the legitimacy of these funds. Funds of this magnitude would have triggered anti money laundering alarms before they were allowed into the banking system.

East African Development Limited supposedly operates an account with the Dubai branch of EFG Private Bank limited. http://www.efginternational.com/ Private bankers are inherently snobbish; it is an exclusive club where having plenty of money does not guarantee access. How would a company like EADL that has no bona fides get access into this elite world?

The final issue here would be screening system used by banks to deal with politically exposed persons. In banking parlance they are called PEPS and no relationship can be established with PEP unless it has been signed off by the country head in the case of international banks. Assuming Sam Kuteesa is indeed a shareholder in EADL, I doubt it would have been impossible to find any information related to him or this entity because higher than normal standards would have been applied.

If all other factors are excluded.

Sherlock Holmes famously stated, if all other possibilities are eliminated whatever remains however improbable must be the truth. I am unwilling, to convict Tullow on the basis of what the opposition politicians are calling evidence because it would call on me to believe that Sam Kuteesa is clinically insane. As is Aidan Heavey, Brian Glover and the evidence of that is as solid as the power of attorney document provided by the opposition.

So if this is not about the truth, then what is it about? There has been some speculation in the media that this is linked to the succession battles within the NRM, in some quarters it is seen as battle between those who actively fought the bush war and those who were part of the external wing. Some say it is about new NRM versus old NRM. That is beyond the scope of this piece.  I can say is the documentation provided does not meet even the lightest standards of proof. As a Ugandan I take exception politicians’ of any persuasion stirring up the hornets’ nest with allegations which hold no water and serve no purpose other than bad showmanship.

Riposte On Libya

I would like to thank those who have read and responded to my previous post on Libya. In some of the more colorful responses I have been called an apologist for the west, and something of a sell out (not in those exact words but the meaning was clear). 

In all this, I am reminded of a quote that is attributed to Julius Nyerere who when faced with increasing criticism of one of his fellow African leaders is supposed to have said ' I cannot take the sides against my fellow African' or words to that effect. True or not it sheds light on a mindset that is representative of many Africans even those not in positions of leadership.

What is at the heart of this debate?

In the simplest terms, it is about what the citizens of any state can reasonably expect from their governments. Libya was by most standards, indeed looking at the latest  human development indicators, head and shoulders above the world. http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/LBY.html

The Libyan people were living lives that many African people can only dream about and that is in part the cause of this divide. I would aver that the Libyan people wanted more, much more from their government. While in Uganda, and indeed in most of Africa we may be happy with good schools and hospitals and roads, the Libyan people seemed to argue, what may be a fantasy in the rest of Africa, an inclusive and functional social system is the bare minimum they expect from their government.  

Put differently, does a society that has most of the social support systems most aspire to have the right to revolt against a system that has delivered on these systems? The answer depends on the aspirations of that society. In an earlier post, I alluded to the fact that a liberal political dispensation has become the accepted norm. In light of the demographic structure of Libya, representative and accountable governments, a respect for universal human rights, various freedoms are now considered normal. Gadaffi had clearly delivered on the social front, but the people he ruled over wanted a more open political system.

Gadaffi the revolutionary Pan- Africanist?

A lot has been said about Gadaffi  and his Pan African credentials. He is the prime mover of the United States of Africa idea, a rendition of a debate as old as most African states. It has also been said he wants to be the ruler of this new entity. Libya, until recently has been a key funder of the African Union picking up the tabs of many of Africa's smaller states. There is no doubt that he has made some positive contributions to the African unity project. However there are some nations that look upon Gadaffi's Pan- African credentials and frown.

A key beneficiary of Gadaffi revolutionary zeal was Charles Taylor. The carnage sown by Mr Taylor through out western Africa with the blessing, funding and training of Gadaffi and his security apparatus is almost biblical. Caveat, Liberia had its own internal tensions mainly along the lines of dividing the political spoils between the native Liberians and the descendants of freed slaves who dominated the Liberian  political system, however it was the emergence of Samuel Doe that served as a catalyst for Libya's involvement.

When Doe violently assumed power, he made two decisions that angered Libya, a firm alliance with the United States and a reestablishment of formal diplomatic ties with the state of Israel. It was these decisions, made well within his rights as the leader of the Liberian people which irked Gadaffi who saw himself as a bastion of anti- Imperialism used interchangeably with anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism.

Capitalizing on this, Taylor and Forday Sankoh of Sierra Leone with training and funding from Libya unleashed Hades hounds on west Africa. As a point of his defense, Charles Taylor argued that Gadaffi was at least partly responsible for some of the crimes committed by his men and went on to suggest Gadaffi should be his co-accused.http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/charles-taylor-defense-gadhafi-trial-war-crimes/story?id=13094284 for a Sierra Leonian perspective please see http://www.shout-africa.com/top-story/libya-indict-muammar-gaddafi-now-for-war-crimes-in-sierra-leone/

Whatever Gadaffi's credentials he bears some personal responsibility for some serious crimes against the people of Africa in general and Liberians and Sierra Leonians in particular. His pernicious influence is also felt in Darfur and Chad, and his treatment of the Berber minority within his country.

Bringing it together.

I have never made any secret of  the fact that I supported the decision to oust Gadaffi for the reasons I have stated above and in other places. I am a firm believer in a liberal open and democratic society because I believe that it is the only system that contains within in sufficient safety valves to preclude the violence that serves as a mile marker on this continent.

That said, I believe the Libyan people are the final arbiters in this debate and their position  is,  thank you very much for the schools and the hospitals and the fine roads that the rest of Africa can only dream about, we as a people want state that best represents our aspirations. A genuinely representative state, not a quasi monarchy led by the King of African kings Muammar Gadaffi and his princes and princess. 

‘Odyssey Dawn’ – Beyond Libya

‘Odyssey Dawn’ – Beyond Libya