As a matter of principle – and one would expect our erstwhile leading opposition candidate would realize it – he was expected to support the Kenyan opposition, if only to remind the rulers there to conduct themselves justly in the polls. Why was this principle ignored?
That is the point for our worries on this exchange between Odinga and Lowassa, a sort of dialogue of the deaf between opposition alliances here and with our neighbours now in the throes of a general election campaign.
One apparent reason for the CHADEMA central committee’s leading voice is the feature in the past general election in Kenya where current President John Magufuli was in Nairobi to express his support for opposition leader Raila Odinga, and it was unclear what his reasons were, exactly.
For one thing, the older reason where Odinga was KANU secretary general was inoperative in 2012, as tribal politics generally prevailed.
When that matrix is applied at present it gives a picture of some sort of Tanzanian opposition relishing to support a Kenyan Central Province-Rift Valley power matrix of those in office at present, even if provinces have been diluted by counties under the new constitution.
No one is deceived though, as the political alliances have remained the same, with each major ethnic bloc having its prominent leader in national politics with an assured position if his alliance of parties wins.
That isn’t what we are struggling to achieve in Tanzania in the next general elections and the former presidential candidate definitely knows this. So why is he doing it?
Plenty of such relationships or political stuff is the province of investigative journalism and other aspects virtually touching on foreign affairs and national integrity and can’t be speculated here.
The point is that this position taking is wrong, and even the previous example were then Works Minister Dr John Magufuli went to Nairobi to support Raila was wrong as well.
There is a slight difference though that Dr Magufuli wasn’t a key policymaker in CCM or in the cabinet at that time; his show of support implicated no one, unlike Lowassa. In that case this is a habit that ought to be abandoned and current expressions withdrawn.
Despite his earlier support for Raila, there is an excellent working relationship between President Magufuli and his Kenyan counterpart Uhuru Kenyatta and this ought to be strengthened.
The Kenyan leader sent his minister for Education lately when we had the massive tragedy of scores of students, two teachers and a driver perishing in a tragic accident in Arusha, and this had nothing to do with the feature that this is a Rift Valley area or close to it.
President Kenyatta leads all Kenyans and Odinga as well aspires to do the same and that is the tonality we ought to take note of as a matter of principle. Our private inclinations must be suppressed here.
Were it that we are so keenly interested in who wins in this or that election in East Africa, we should raise the matter of pushing towards an East Africa Federation in case we perceive that development synergies would make a difference.
That has always been the mood in Nairobi and to an extent in Kampala and Kigali, not in Dar es Salaam definitely and similarly in Bujumbura. Our leaders made no effort to bring the public to accept fast-tracking of the federation, leaving ex-president Jakaya Kikwete and foreign minister Bernard Membe isolated. Those are the facts.
Dividing Ruaha a good start for wider national parks, game reserves review
CONSULTATIONS have reached an advanced stage in efforts by two Mbeya Region districts, Chunya and Mbarali, to hive off portions of Ruaha National Park for the use of farmers in various villages of the two districts.
A report presented to a recent sitting of the Regional Consultative Committee said that what was awaited was President John Magufuli’s acceptance of the proposal so its implementation could start.
While this is now being discussed or awaiting approval for Mbeya region or the two districts, many such cases await attention across the country, and for cause.
In heated parliamentary exchanges lately concerning the way game wardens sell off cattle captured in parks and game reserves in Kagera region, and apparently the same thing was being done in other regions, some measures were being announced to stop the habit.
Minister for Natural Resources and Tourism Prof. Jumanne Maghembe directed national park and game reserve authorities to stop selling captured cattle in the parks and instead take them to a public auction. Still that isn’t precisely the problem – where can locals conduct agriculture, herders take cattle?
Muleba South MP Prof. Anna Tibaijuka pointedly demanded where peasants should go if there is no farming land, only exclusive borders of game reserves, etc. In other words there is a strategic choice that has to be made in various regions as to borders of game reserves vis a vis legitimate needs for farming land.
And even for cattle grazing, as cattle easily live with wildlife but add a burden to the land that isn’t always consonant with conservation needs. That is how herders come into conflict with parks managements, in seeking greener pastures in the parks by habit.
It isn’t clear to us what the law about conservation generally says, for instance how are routine conflicts between conservation and farming needs resolved, but the usual attitude is to lay boundaries of parks or reserves and expect compliance from villagers.
That might be sacrosanct as legal thinking but there is another way to look at the problem, that the area was declared a game park not because it has animals but because it had no people in the first place, or they would have cut down animal populations considerably, forcing them into farther hinterlands, etc.
If one takes a cue from government thinking on the matter, or the political tonality and implication of the legal position, the idea is that there is already separation of farming spheres and conservation areas, and any problems facing peasants ought to be sorted out within the farming sphere.
The problem is that this sphere too can’t be re-divided so that peasants can share, and hence those lacking land are left out.
To get an acceptable solution to the problem as a whole, two lines of change are feasible; one a general review of specification of areas for game reserves and national parks taking into account accentuated needs for farming land, and scale in conservation, that some areas are too expensive and yield little in comparison for instance to the northern tourist circuit.
This idea for each region or district saying it has attractions is unrealistic as it fails to take into account realities of the totality of wildlife or geographical fantasies being on fingertip with television, for wildlife fans.
We can cut down the zones or issue customary titles to individuals so that investors can buy land, get credit and put peasants to labour and thus off the land.
_0.jpg?itok=QU87XW8D){kind=tracking}
.jpeg?itok=vCj6bCRe)
