In an interesting (but probably passing) change of direction, China is putting pressure on Sudan “to seek urgently the release of 29 Chinese workers held by rebels in the border state of South Kordofan.” China traditionally sees national sovereignty as sacrosanct. But now it is their ox being gored and suddenly a fixed position on questions of national sovereignty seems foolish. Hopefully they keep this incident in mind the next time one of their client states commits brutality against its own people.

African Heads of State meet in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (EPA/Jacoline Prinsloo)

The African Union was supposed to decide on its leadership this week. Instead gridlock has set in. South Africa had hoped that its Home Affairs Minister, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, would emerge victorious, but she has been unable to garner enough votes. As this story has developed I have been skeptical of whether or not Dlamini-Zuma could muster enough supports. Not because she is not qualified. But rather because South Africa occupies an interesting position on the continent. By virtually every measure it is the most powerful country on the continent, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. But that means that many Africans are wary of South Africa and want to push back against its pretensions to continental leadership. Or at least its pretensions to official positions of leadership. Culturally, economically, politically, and militarily the country is the de facto regional superpower.

Meanwhile Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe has denounced the AU for recognizing Libya’s National Transitional Council at a recent summit. At the Harare airport, Mugabe levied accusations toward his African colleagues for being: “‘fronts’ for Western powers whose ‘criminal’ NATO bombardment of Libya helped lead to the killing of Col. Moammar Gadhafi, a former Mugabe ally.” Of course he did.

Finally, if you’re going to be anywhere near the Research Triangle in North Carolina this weekend, I’d encourage you to swing by the South East Regional Seminar in African Studies (SERSAS) and the South East Africanist Network (SEAN) Conference. The main program will take place on Saturday at the University of North Carolina’s Fedex Global Education Center. The conference theme is “Border Crossings, Migrations, and Interventions,” but panels will deviate from those themes. I’m on the panel and would love to meet any readers who might be in the area.

The ANC has marked up some notable achievements. It enshrined civil and social rights in the constitution. It abolished the death penalty. It has built more than 3m free or subsidised houses, and has brought clean water, sanitation and electricity to millions more. Every child now has a right to at least 12 years of education. More than 15m people, almost a third of the population, get some form of welfare. Severe malnutrition among children under five has been almost eradicated. Some 6m pupils get free school meals. Having at last accepted the link between HIV and AIDS, the ANC now has a grip on the epidemic, one of the world’s worst. Crime is coming down; the murder rate has fallen by half from its peak in 1994. The ANC has set up anti-corruption agencies in a proclaimed effort to bring corrupt people to book.

But for most South Africans, the stench of graft, patronage and greed surrounding the ruling party itself is now too strong. The romance, solidarity and heroism of the days of struggle have gone. In the popular mind, ANC people, from the president down, seem keener on power, status and ostentatious wealth than on improving the lot of the poor. Always a broad church, the ANC is riven with factionalism and in-fighting. Lip service is paid to the old ideals, but the party seems increasingly rudderless. It has lost its way.

It seems that the first of these paragraphs is hard to dismiss and the second does not hold up on the evidence. No one I know of in South Africa supports graft, patronage, or greed. But how can one possibly assert that the stench of those things “surrounding the party is now too strong” when the ANC will win the next national elections overwhelmingly and with a 60%+ tally? This is a peculiar and arithmetically-challenged definition of “most.” In fact, the first paragraph is empirically right and the second is empirically wrong.

Photo: Reuters

Call it the O-effect. Passing with flying colors, seventy-two South African girls from disadvantaged backgrounds graduated from the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls (the academy’s first graduates) in South Africa this past Saturday. True to the old adage that to educate a woman is to educate a nation, the queen of talk shows Oprah Winfrey spent US$40 million of her own fortune to build a girls-only school in South Africa.

The importance of education for girls in South Africa, and sub-Saharan Africa in general, cannot be overstated. Due to colonial policies and patriarchal traditional systems/beliefs (such as early marriage, teen pregnancies, and preferences for educating boys over girls), Africa’s women, especially those from poor backgrounds, lag behind in education and socio-economic mobility. Consequently, education for girls has proliferated (with good intention) in post-colonial Africa, largely as a result of UNICEF’s worldwide effort to invest in girls’ education. The notion, however, that boys from disadvantaged backgrounds somehow have better opportunities than their female counterparts is masking the staggering reality that many boys in South Africa (and other countries in Africa) are in prisons or streets (making a living from the streets) instead of graduating from colleges and universities. Is the preferred choice for educating and prioritizing girls endangering boys’ chance for education, especially those in rural areas who face the same hurdles as girls?

Nonetheless, this “O-Model” of education for success—which pumps a lot of resources into schools, equips them with state of the art facilities, and invests in qualified staff, hands-on management, and strong mentorship—indeed presents an historic opportunity for South Africa. So, there are good and obvious reasons for South Africa and other African governments to applaud, listen, and pay attention to OWLA’s achievement. It is a rare phenomenon for African schools for all Grade 12 students to pass and be accepted to universities in South Africa and abroad all at the same time. Oprah herself, in her celebratory comments, has hinted at working with the South African government and other African governments to promote education for the underprivileged.

But can this “O-Model” of education for success be replicated and emulated to address South Africa or any other sub-Saharan country’s educational crisis? The answer is both yes and no.

Yes because depilated schools, haphazard learning environments, and laissez-faire leadership and management style are what is failing kids from disadvantaged communities because they are trapped in these failing schools.

No because the O-Model focuses too much on the top performing students-those students who are academically talented; therefore, a struggling child from the same underprivileged background stands no chance to be admitted in the Oprah-like leadership academy/school.

This approach of pitting the top against the bottom is what is at the heart of the education crisis in South Africa and Africa in general. To be a struggling child (boy or girl) in the African education system is to be condemned to a life without opportunities or support. Instead of helping a struggling child by raising him/her to the level of an academically gifted student, for the most part resources (such as scholarships, bursaries, recognition, and other incentives) are spent on the top performing students or top performing schools.

What is the plight of a struggling child, an underachiever, in the African education system? Is he/she teachable or not? The answer is an affirmative yes. Every child is teachable and I believe that underachievers from poor communities, if provided opportunities at the same ferocity as what the O-Academy does, would turn out to be top achievers too.

1. Summary of 2011

There were three issues that defined 2011 in South Africa.

Demonstrations against the "Secrecy Bill". Source: Reuters

1) By far the most significant of these was the controversy over the Protection of State Information Bill. For many years the ANC’s critics — white, usually, though not always — have accused the party of having dictatorial tendencies. These accusations have by and large been nonsense. Until now. The Information Bill, which putatively protects state secrets from being released via the media — a canard if ever there was one — represents an Apartheid-style bill in post-apartheid clothing. If government has the ability to control, menace, and punish an independent media, that media ceases to be independent. Let’s say that you trust the current iteration of the ANC. And let’s say, fairly, that even as the party has had the necessary 2/3 of the vote, or close to it, to allow them unilaterally to amend the constitution, it has not done so. But whenever an act of government such as this passes a useful question to ask is not what this dispensation might do with it, but rather what a future, more draconian dispensation might do. The question is not whether one should trust this government. The question is whether to trust any potential future government.

What has been reassuring has been the extent to which the passage of the bill met with vibrant public dissent. Arguably civil society became more engaged with this issue than any other political question in the post-apartheid era. “Black Tuesday” protests both real and symbolic (in the form of wearing black and in many cases tape over one’s mouth) took place across the country and dominated the news cycle and brought out the best among journalists and public intellectuals. So far all of this protest was to little avail, but it is telling that South Africans did not passively take this news or gnash teeth and ball their fists impotently.

2) During the World War II era in the United States (and in other parts of the world) labor unions had tremendous potential leverage but chose not to exercise it, deciding instead to act for what they believe was the greater good. But once the war ended, so too did the gentleman’s agreement about mass strikes and as a result labor actions proliferated. The Public Sector Strikes that hammered South Africa throughout the country’s winter of labour discontent revealed both the extent of working class dissatisfaction with the ANC and served to reveal the hangover from the 2010 World Cup. By and large the unions chose not to strike during the World Cup the previous winter, but those chickens roosted this year and then some. COSATU may be in alliance with the ANC from an official governance standpoint. But the unions flexed their muscles throughout 2011, once again revealing that the tripartite Alliance might not be on all that sound footing.

3) The ANC’s very public rebuke of Julius Malema, the ANC Youth League’s enfant terrible, represents the latest act but not the last act in an ongoing drama. Malema stands, I’m going to assume, as the country’s Phoenix in waiting. Like Richard Nixon in the early 1960s Malema has vowed that he has exited politics. Trust me — whatever he says, Malema is not done with public life in South Africa. He is destined to rise from the ashes, and when he does, he will carry significant numbers of supporters with him. Maybe not enough to change the country’s political calculus, but enough to make the party hierarchy uncomfortable.

2. Most Unexpected Event

1) In a country where the unexpected is expected it is hard to identify one shocking event or incident. But for observers of South African sport 2011 was not a great year. The Springboks exited the World Cup in rather desultory fashion (though they did outplay Australia in every aspect of the game but the scoreboard, the scoreboard is the only measure that matters). Bafana Bafana was left on the outside looking in when the national team’s leadership did not realize that more than a tie was necessary to progress to the continent’s championship. And the Proteas? Well, they continue to be the best international cricket team never to assert its dominance and they don’t seem any closer to doing so now than they have since their return to international cricket.

But seriously — not knowing the rules of advancement for a major international tournament? Unforgivable.

2) I do know that many of you may not be as sports mad as I am. So the other big surprise, at least for me, was the anticlimactic way that Julius Malema stepped down from his perch at the ANC Youth League. Despite Malema’s Nixonian pronouncements that he’s done with public life, such disavowals are in the nature of the political phoenix. I’m willing to place wagers that we will, in fact, have Julius Malema to kick around in years to come.

3. Person/Group of the Year

There are three possibilities.

1) In a country where everything is political, especially that which isn’t, and that is so dominated by the ANC not only politically but culturally as well, is it any surprise that President Jacob Zuma stands at the top of this list? Love him, hate him, or tolerate him, Zuma is the essential figure in South African political life. It is quite possible that Zuma will face a political storm at the end of the year, but, assuming that he still holds on to power in the party he is likely to continue to maintain this spot for some time to come.

2) For sheer significance in a year in which a mass of public sector workers flexed some muscles and reminded people of the potentially outsized role of COSATU it is hard to overstate the importance of COSATU General Seceratary Zwelinzima Vavi. Vavi emerges every so often to speak, and when he does so, people listen. Vavi could prove to be a kingmaker. Keep an eye on him.

3) For all of the reasons stated above (and for more stated below) Julius Malema continues to be a vital figure in the country’s politics, no less so because of his avowal that he is exiting public life.

4. Forecast for 2012

1) Is the country looking at another Polokwane Moment? In December the ANC will meet in Magaung and in so doing will elect the party president and thus the almost certain winner of the country’s next national elections (and lots of other elected positions of importance). You will recall that in December 2007 the ANC ousted Thabo Mbeki from the party presidency, which began the process of his ultimate humiliation in stepping down from the presidency of the country months later. Jacob Zuma was the chief beneficiary of the events in Polokwane. But many in the party have not been especially comfortable with Zuma either personally or politically. And understandably so.

Will this dissatisfaction give way to a push similar to the one that pushed Mbeki from party leadership? The odds are against it, but Zuma has more detractors within the party than an ANC president should find comfortable. A further irony is that the ANC Youth League might be looking for Zuma’s scalp. There are rumors that Thabo Mbeki might be their man. How unfathomable would that be?

2) More on Malema: Indeed, I would not be surprised if he is visible by the time of the ANC’s party conference in Mangaung in December. Malema may for the time being be persona non grata in the ANC. But will that endure if there is enough of a public clamoring for Malema’s redemption? And if that does not happen, might Malema look toward another political party and another political party toward him?

3) And expect the ANC centenary to dominate the year. And for current party leaders to cloak themselves in that history. Whatever other predictions I make, this one, I’m pretty certain, will be right.

(By the way, in last year’s Year in Review post, which was about the continent as a whole, I think I did respectably in my forecast. The key? Much like with astrology or fortune telling, don’t get too specific!)

5. Best Book of 2011

In a year of good books about Africa, if I have to choose one to recommend, I would go with Stephen Chan’s fine Southern Africa: Old Treacheries and New Deceits, in which a respected academic expert on the region provides an accessible overview of the state of affairs in Southern Africa with particular emphasis on South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Zambia.

Have a great 2012, and thanks for reading.

In the Arab world, in particular North Africa, what is being now referred to as the Arab Spring made 2011 a tough year for the dictatorial regimes of Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, and of course Gaddafi, who was killed in Libya. In the Western world, a movement that started as Occupy Wall Street in New York stirred up similar protests across major cities in the US, Britain, Italy, Germany, France, Spain, Portugal and Asian countries as citizens fought back against growing greed and inequality. Public anger over the debt crisis brought down Prime Minister George Papandreou and Silvio Berlusconi in Greece and Italy respectively.

Yet, despite the Southern African region’s high level of poverty, unemployment, and inequality, we did not see a wave of public anger similar to what we have seen across the globe. In a case study of five Southern African countries, the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa has found that poverty and inequality is tearing apart Zimbabwe, Swaziland, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa and Angola, with many citizens living on a mere US$1 per day. The irony here is that some of those countries, such as Namibia and South Africa, are resource-rich countries with some of the highest GDP in the world.

Amid this global backlash against greed and inequality, why were most Southern African streets (apart from isolated and sporadic protests in Malawi and Swaziland) empty, quiet, and business as usual? What happened to the militant spirit that has sent many young people toyi-toying in the streets of Namibia, Zimbabwe, and South Africa against colonialism, poverty, and social injustice in the 60s and 80s?

One answer given for this widespread citizenry indifference in Southern African has been explained in terms of the belief that some of the governments in the region would not hesitate to use harsh measures if confronted by an Arab Spring-like mass action. True to this, in Zimbabwe some 45 activists were rounded up and charged with treason for watching a Mideast uprising video. In Malawi, the security force launched a violent crackdown on the protestors, leaving at least 18 protestors dead. In Swaziland, pro-democracy activists were banned, arrested, tear-gassed, and sprayed with water cannons.

It is also true that when the uprising was under way in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, none of the Southern Africa governments (well, South Africa maybe did but flip-flopped later to save face with the radicals within the ANC and other hawkish Africanists in the region) picked up a phone to urge Mubarak, Gadaffi, or Ben Ali to exercise restraint in dealing with the protestors. Instead, what we heard from Southern African governments was the usual song of complaint about Western interference in Africa’s internal matters.

But here is another explanation: Southern African citizens’ indifference can be explained in a “been there and done that” syndrome. This is because in some ways Southern Africa is a little bit ahead of North Africa in terms of democratization, meaning that most governments in Southern Africa are products of democracy and came to power through elections. Whereas North Africa might have been stable and economically advanced but did not have democratic governments. However, a distinctive characteristic of the southern African democracy is that not only we have a democracy without democrats but also a democracy without citizens. Southern Africa’s democracies did not and do not produce citizens but subjects controlled by governments due to the hierarchical nature of Southern African politics which demands obedience and loyalty from citizens. Why? Although they claim to have fought for democracy (such as SWAPO in Namibia, ANC in South Africa, MPLA in Angola, FRELIMO in Mozambique and ZANU-PF in Zimbabwe), most ruling parties in Southern Africa don’t operate as democrats. Their politics and decision making processes are highly centralized. By the way, the same can also be said about most opposition political parties too.

It is against the backlog of this unquestioning and uncritical citizenry, that we understand why Mugabe is still in power today and why most ruling parties in that region have won elections with landslide victory. This is why the Namibian president can place a moratorium on public discussions about the SWAPO presidential succession. And this is why the ANC-dominated National Assembly in South Africa can pass a law (reversing the gains made against apartheid repressive laws and policies) to limit free speech.

On the flip side, events in North Africa made the world forget (as the international media and world government shifted its attention to the Arab Spring) about Southern Africa, especially with regard to what’s going on in Zimbabwe and Malawi

SWAPO March

Here are a few predictions for 2012: The ruling party SWAPO’s 2012 election campaign to replace the incumbent Namibian president when his term expires is shaping up to be between Geingob (who is the vice president of SWAPO) and me Pendukeni Ithana (who is the secretary of SWAPO). One is believed to be a technocrat and the other a populist. But both are insiders, so expect less change here if either of them wins. What is clear, however, is that another potential split (this would be the third split if it happens) from the ruling party is looming as the in-fighting has already started. More is too come as we inch closer to Election Day.

Robert Mugabe

In Zimbabwe, it is clear that the opposition party MDC (MDC has lost the mojo, and has been weakened by in-fighting too) is not the party that will bring down Mugabe (as it was hoped), but expect a potential split within the ruling ZANU-PF party. As Mugabe’s health continues to deteriorate, we expect infighting as members vie for control and Mugabe’s position.

On the other hand, South Africa will continue walking the populist road and of course with less transparent governance. Unless restored, expect the worst from Malawi because its life line support, which is aid from the international community, has been cut off, which is going to make life difficult for ordinary citizens. Angola and Mozambique (riding on oil) will continue unabated because we don’t really hear much about these two countries in terms of international coverage anyway. The remaining question is will Swaziland eventually collapse economically, or has it already collapsed?

A new report from the Africa Center for Strategic Studies (ACSS), Africa and the Arab Spring: A New Era of Democratic Expectations, the first volume of the Africa Center’s new Special Report series, uses the Arab Spring as a lens through which to view African politics. I think it is a bit too overdetermined to look at the Arab Spring and to look at ongoing crises in African politics and think that the one will fuel changes in the other. But the report is soundly done and certainly raises a number of important ideas and questions.

Deposed African National Congress Youth League leader Julius Malema believes he is finished in South African political life and plans to become a cattle farmer. Just remember, a phoenix has to fall before he can rise again. Don’t for one minute think that Malema’s turn in public life is complete.

Gbenga Sesan, the executive director of Paradigm Initiative Nigeria, has written a public letter to Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan. In it he asks some pretty pointed questions, including this one: “If the president can throw his wife a party in Australia and senators earn millions of dollars a year, why does the president keep asking us, the people, to make sacrifices?”

Recent revelations of obesity in South Africa raise the question: “Has Freedom Made Us Fat?” My guess would be that affluence more than freedom is the source of obesity in the richest country on the continent. Yes, tens of millions of South Africans do not share in the country’s wealth, but the country’s middle classes are doing quite well, and there has always been a link between weight and wealth on a continent where the former can actually serve as a status symbol indicating the latter.

According to Jeffrey Gettleman of The New York Times, “…the African Union force in Somalia has hardened into a war-fighting machine — and it seems to be winning the war.” Progress has clearly been excruciatingly slow but these advances coupled with more aggressive action from Kenyan troops reveals that the region’s leaders are not resigned to Somalia being a failed state forever.

I am late in getting my Year in Review post up for 2011, but for the time being, here is the Mail & Guardian’s slideshow of South Africa’s most memorable moments of the year.

Photo: UK Daily Mail

A couple of weeks back South African cricket legend Basil D’Oliviera passed away, presumably from complications due to the Parkinson’s disease from which he had suffered for many years. D’Oliviera is best known for his centrality in the crisis that bore his name, the “D’Oliviera Affair.” Unable to play cricket at the highest levels in Apartheid South Africa, D’Oliviera moved to England where he made the national team, starkly revealing the absurdity of Apartheid sport and destroying any argument that black athletes could not compete in the elite ranks. In 1968 when England’s cricket team was set to tour South Africa. Prime Minister John Vorster refused to allow D’Oliviera to play in South Africa. England withdrew from the tour, accelerating South Africa’s isolation from the world of sport.

Less well known is that a few years earlier D’Oliviera led the non-racial South African Cricket Board of Control (Sacboc) national team on a tour of East Africa. While the SACBOC team did not include any white players, who of their own volition refused to participate in Sacboc, D’Oliviera’s squad was the most representative in the history of the sport in South Africa until the end of sporting isolation in the 1990s.

So what to make of these decisions? They probably will provide a Rorschach test that will confirm whatever the beholder believes about the ANC. Some possible interpretations (note that not all of these are mutually exclusive):

Ah ha! Malema finally got what was coming to him. It has been evident for some time that Malema was going to receive some sort of punishment. This at least was decisive.

That the ANC is unwilling to acept dissent and thus is another sign of how far the party has come from the dreams of 1994.

That the ANC is unwilling to accept a certain kind of dissent and behavior that does harm to the party, and it took the proper action as parties in democracies around the world do all the time. After all, there is a reason why the position of party whip exists just about everywhere.

That in one fell swoop the ANC hierarchy has removed its greatest potential internal challenger. Jacob Zuma may have to face internecine struggles down the road for control of the party but Malema won’t be among those looking to wrest control from him. Of course now Malema may be able to parlay free agency into power. Is it absurd to think that the Democratic Alliance (DA) might go after Malema? It would seem so, except in South African politics there may be no scenario so absurd that it cannot happen. And there would be nothing absurd about the Congress of the people (COPE) going after Malema. Hell, for the time being COPE remains an agglomeration of egos as much as a political party. Why not add ne more to the cocktail and stir?

Whatever the interpretation, for the time at least, the old guard holds the upper hand over the Youth League and they have won decisively. Whatever dreams Malema might have had of a 1940s-style Mandela-Tambo-Sisulu Young Turks moment seems to have passed.

That said, only a fool believes that Malema will slink away with his head bowed. Malema is not the slinking type. I expect some sort of bombastic verbal throwdown any time now. It may not be all that edifying, but I expect that South African politics will be pretty entertaining for the next few days, weeks, months, and years. Then again, ’twas always thus, and always thus shall be.

South Africa's Sports Minister Fikile Mbalula. Credit: Getty Images

Is South Africa’s Sports and Recreation Minister Fikile Mbalula using a traditionally marginalized cabinet position as a springboard to something larger within the ANC hierarchy? Nickolaus Bauer of the Mail & Guardian thinks so.

There is no reason why the Sports Ministry or any other traditionally modest post cannot provide an opportunity to shine. Competence and savvy are not restricted to high-profile ministries, and while there are many competent people in the ANC there are also a lot of people punching above their competencies, serving because of who they are rather than what they are best positioned to do. If Mbalula shines in this traditionally marginal (though in some ways disproportionately high profile given the status of sport in South Africa) portfolio, Jacob Zuma and the rest of the party hierarchy will surely notice, and another cabinet reshuffling is always around the corner.

It is easy to get caught up in sport at its highest level. In rugby that means focusing on national team competitions, on the professional game, on the elite club sides. In Africa this almost always means the Springboks, the Tri-Nations and World Cup, the Super 16, the Currie Cup, with occasional feints to minnows Kenya and Namibia and Zimbabwe. And yet as with any sport, while most people might fixate on elite performances as public entertainment, the fact is that we need to take a broader view of what sport means in society. While the tiny slice of the population that plays sport for a living garners most of the headlines, the vast majority of athletes will never play on television and will see their competitive careers end somewhere well before they are old enough to vote.

Thus society ought to spend more time connecting sport to lived reality rather than to its fantastical ideal. Using sport to help get kids through school or to teach valuable life lessons. And before we get too carried away in sport’s all-powerful capacity to change, sports are also fun, and for children fun is an ends all on its own. This is why I hoped that one of the outcomes of the FIFA World Cup would be to help bring greater access to football to kids throughout South Africa. Whether or not that goal will be realized is dubious and progress seems so far to be faltering. But the ideal still remains, and in one tiny slice of Senegal people are trying to realize that ideal.

As an almost universal rule I try not to by into “the better team lost” arguments in team sports where the only measure of “better” comes via the scoreboard. After all, by better do we mean more aesthetically? More fundamentally sound? More statistically dominant? Winning makes a team better and being better means a team wins.

But the Australia game, an in many ways ugly but thrilling 11-9 Wallaby win in a clash of two global rugby titans, puts my reductionist view of sporting superiority to the test. The Boks went in as the favorites and by almost any measure dominated the game against Australia. They controlled possession. They dominated territory. But they could not push the tries across, and the two times they did put the ball down across the line the referee blew the whistle for forward passes.  Australia capitalized on Springbok failures and mistakes and took advantage of a bit of luck and a lot of dubious refereeing. In that sense, and by the all-important scoreboard, I have to agree with Wallabies coach Robbie Deans when he says that his team deserved to win.

Or at least I have to agree intellectually. It doesn’t sit well with me emotionally, though. And I think the universal consensus is that Coach Peter DeVilliers is on his way out the door.

Bafana Bafana brings up a different set of frustrations. Basically, after losing to Niger a few weeks back South Africa believed it was left needing a win or a tie and for Egypt to defeat Niger by more than one goal in order to advance to the African Cup of Nations finals. That, optimistic Bafana officials believed, would grant them the tiebreaker on point differential. And they thought this for a simple reason — that is the general rule for FIFA tournaments the world over, including the World Cup and European championships.

And so things played out according to script. Egypt, long out of the tournament in crushingly disappointing fashion, nonetheless showed up to play against Niger, winning 3-0 in Cairo. Bafana played to a rather desultory draw, in part because Coach Pitso Mosimane had told them to play for the tie upon learning that Niger had dug themselves a hole that they were not going to get out of. When the game ended in a 0-0 draw the team and its officials and the media and just about everyone celebrated. Making the finals of the continental showcase is still a big deal even though it is frankly embarrassing that South Africa has sunk to such levels that just making the finals of the CAF tournament is cause for revelry.

But hold the phones. It turns out that CAF has its own rules, and those included a tiebreaker that included head-to-head competition. By winning their last matchup in Niamey Niger stamped their ticket to Gabon and Guinea next year. South Africa is protesting the decision, but let’s be realistic. They are unlikely to get a favorable ruling from either CAF or, if a protest gets that far, FIFA, though the sport’s international governing body might encourage the African body to change their rules going forward.

Oh, and things kind of stink in South African cricket, too.

The stakes are high for this election which is being hailed as a litmus test in the nation’s transitional journey to peace and democracy. Indications suggest that the incumbent will likely win, but this election could also be a referendum on the reign of Ma Ellen (as she is affectionately referred to by many Liberians). Here is what to watch for:

Voter turnout: If indications can be obtained from the controversial referendum poll held on August 23, low voter turnout would hurt the incumbent Ma Johnson Sirleaf and her Unity Party. The results of the referendum poll, however, are potentially suspect, as the ballots had a print error which confused the voters. The referendum on constitutional changes asked voters to choose whether to amend four propositions regarding judge tenure, elections scheduling, presidential candidate requirements, and the electoral system. Following the referendum election results, none of the four proposition amendments obtained the necessary two-thirds of votes required to amend the constitution due to the low voter turnout. The defeat was a blow to the ruling party, which heavily wanted the referendum to pass, and a victory for the main opposition Congress for Democratic Change which boycotted the referendum.

The low voter turnout could be partly explained by lack of information and awareness but also many Liberians did not really think that the referendum was a big deal for them. This sentiment was confirmed by the many Liberians I interacted with on my recent work assignment in the country. In addition, Mother Nature could complicate the matter further if it rains on Tuesday. A lot of people could be forced to stay home instead of voting.

What is on the mind of the voters? Is it peace and stability or kitchen table issues? If peace and stability are what many voters would have on their mind that is good news for the governing Unity Party. Coming from over two decades of a brutal civil conflict, Liberia’s four years of relative peace and stability have brought the country forward a long way, a marker many ordinary Liberians are using to evaluate and judge the importance of Tuesday’s elections.

But if it is kitchen table issues, I see a problem for Ms. Johnson Sirleaf and the Unity Party. Even amidst unemployment, poverty and entrenched corruption, many ordinary Liberians are very happy with the peace and stability the country is enjoying but are very frustrated with the situation on the ground because they have not seen their living conditions improving. It’s important to remember that these conditions are mostly not the fault of the current president considering that she started building the country from ground zero. However, these frustrations are the heart of what the CDC is tapping in their hopes of a big defeat to unseat the Unity Party and Ms Johnson

The Loser’s Reaction. Most importantly, all will depend on whether the loser of the election would accept the results. This is also a problem connected to the fairness of the process. Therefore, the National Elections Commission (NEC) and the UN should up its game in order to avoid repeating the same mistakes made during the Referendum, unnecessary errors which might make the elections questionable. It is beyond my understanding that a ballot paper printed in Denmark with the assistance of UNDP had an error (not a complicated error for that matter).

What is Next? Whoever wins, he/she must start thinking about strategies to translate the electoral gains into meaningful programs of action to improve the living and material conditions of ordinary Liberians. It seems that the primary focus of this election is on security, as it should be—the continuation of peace and stability-but in the long run, I see the reality on the ground as the greatest challenge. This is a reality where the elites (in government and private sectors are indifferent towards the hardships of ordinary people on the ground. A reality of corruption and a reality of unemployment.

Of the 53 countries assessed (South Sudan had not yet gained autonomy and Western Sahara has not yet been recognized as an independent nation state) here are the top ten:

1. Mauritius  2. Cape Verde  3. Botswana  4. Seychelles  5. South Africa  6. Namibia  7. Ghana  8. Lesotho  9. Tunisia  10. Egypt

Clearly Southern Africa does well, with four representatives in the top ten, as do islands, with three.

The bottom ten (from the very worst to the merely awful):

53. Somalia  52. Chad  51. Zimbabwe  50. Democratic Republic of Congo  49. Central African Republic  48. Sudan  47. Eritrea  46. Côte d’Ivoire  45. Equitorial Guinea  44. Guinea-Bissau

Obviously the instability in the Horn and in Central Africa explains a great deal of the composition of the bottom feeders. And parts of West Africa continue to be wracked with instability though that region seems to have some of the continent’s greatest variance with a number of success stories (Ghana, Benin at 11, Senegal at 15) to go with those on the other end of the spectrum.