US Halts Family Reunification of Refugees

The US State Department has halted the family reunification of African refugees due to their belief that the participants were creating fraud. The article by BBC did not say what prompted it, but DNA tests were issued on samples of applicants and showed that only about 20% had blood relation. The State Department and Homeland security thus deemed this a fraud and have halted the program.
It is clear that the implementors of this investigation are ignorant of African kinship networks. Family is regarded as anyone who comes from the same village, compound, or community as you and is very rarely genetically defined. Also, as the African diaspora expands, Africans define family even more loosely. I, myself, who was not brought up in Cameroon refer to my family members as fellow Cameroonians that I've known since childhood, those who come from the same village as my parents, and even those who share the same dialect as my parents. I often and easily refer to someone that I may have met that same day as my cousin, aunt, or uncle.
Likewise, I come from a very large family and have more cousins than I can count. My mother being the most successful of the family has financially supported almost all of my cousins. For this reason many of them view her as their mother and if they were to immigrate to the US, she would call them her daughter or son.
Ultimately, I understand why an African refugee would refer to an extended relative or someone that is not a blood relative as their child or daughter. There is a good chance that they raised them! Especially in communities ravaged by warfare, such as the ones tested, where a child may have been orphaned. But I think that the US should rethink its labeling of this frequency of occurrences as a fraud and instead realize that if the pattern was found in so many countries (Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, Uganda, Ghana, Guinea, Gambia and Ivory Coast), perhaps there's a gap in intercultural communication. And more importantly, if the resources and opportunities already exist for these people to be resettled and removed from potentially violent situations- why prevent it on such an arbitrary basis?

Africans for Obama

I knew that with all the excitement in Africa surrounding Senator Barack Obama's presidential nomination, it was only a matter of time before profiteers would rear their ugly heads.

As I have said a million times and will continue to say, I am a staunch supporter of Barack Obama, however, many Africans abroad seem to care more about Obama's political campaign than they do the politics of their own nation! Perhaps it is their way of coping with the pervasive lack of democracy consuming the continent or perhaps they celebrate his achievement in hopes that other Black leaders will follow his example.

But what I don't understand and most definitely cannot accept is the exploitation of Obama's campaign abroad.

The BBC recently exposed a group calling itself Africans for Obama that was holding fundraisers under the premise of Barack Obama's campaign. The group was charging $21,000 a table for events in support of Obama's bid for presidency. However, US political parties cannot accept funds from groups outside of the US. When the BBC confronted the leader of the group with this minor, but critical detail, she stated that the purpose of the event was raise funds to spend on advertising to convince their relatives in the US to vote for Obama in the upcoming election.

Putting aside the ridiculousness of this justification for fraud, why couldnt such an event be launched to reach out to rural voters within their own country and educate them about their political process, or to raise funds to ensure that all children receive insecticide treated bed nets to reduce the level of fatalities due to malaria, or to ensure that all households had access to safe and clean water, or donated to a million other issues that have hampered development in Africa?!?!?

Tonight, Barack Obama will become the first Black man to accept a major party nomination for President of the United States. Let us come together as Africans in support of his accomplishment and draft US foreign policy objectives that will build on Obama's legacy and benefit Africans across the globe!

Long Live the King! But What About His Subjects...?

About a month ago I watched the documentary Without the King, which is a socioeconomic profile of Swaziland and the affects of monarchy. Knowing very little about Swaziland before watching this film, I was shocked by what it candidly exposed.



King Mswati, who took the throne when he was only 18, has been internationally criticized for his lavish lifestyle amidst Swaziland's immense poverty. The documentary stars Princess Sikhanyiso, who is often called "Pashu", as she prepares to begin college in California and explore the impact that she can soon have on the development of her homeland. She gives us a tour of the king's exquisite mansion while the viewer is simultaneously shown the conditions that most Swazi's live in- dilapidated one room shacks, lacking access to clean water. The film also depicts citizens' desire to eliminate the country's autocratic royal rule and transition into a democracy. Many believe that it is the country's system of governance that has led to the king's exploitation of country resources and citizens' extreme poverty, dependency on international aid, and the highest aids rate in the world.

I was hoping that perhaps the producers of the documentary already had preconceived notions about the method of governance in Swaziland and were using the film as a political platform for change. However, as I have browsed news of the past ten years reporting on Swaziland, I am quite saddened by the lack of international attention this country has received, considering the seriousness of the humanitarian situation and blatant misappropriation of national resources by the king.

As far back as 2000, large scale demonstrations were staged protesting the lack of political parties and the abuse of royal power, which had even led to the forced removal of people from their homes because a prince wanted the land.

In order to help halt the spread of HIV/AIDS, the King instituted a sex ban in September of 2001, that was to last for five years. Unmarried girls under the age of 18 were instructed to wear tassels, warning men not to touch them. If they did, the men would be fined one cow or $152.



However, within one month, the King himself violated the ban by becoming engaged to a 17 year old girl. In a gesture of compliance with tradition, he donated one cow to a local village.
The King's disobeyal of the traditional was just another step in his abuse of power. In 2005, King Mswati ended the sex ban a year early and chose his new 17 year old wife shortly thereafter.

Aaaaah, but the joys of being a Queen. Though the women at times publicly battle for King Mswati's affection, he ensures that they enjoy the same level of luxury that he does by buying them luxury cars to match his own. But all this does not compare to his private jet, that was featured in the film and flew the Princess to school in California.

The most recent blatant misuse of the government's funds took place last week when the King's wives chartered a plane to go shopping in Europe and the Middle East.




Swaziland is a landlocked country, thus its opportunity to enter the global economy severely hampered. It is so unfortunate that a country that prides itself in its ability to maintain its culture and tradition has been forced to seek modernity for the sake of their own livelihoods! I do not have a solution to the crisis that pervades Swaziland, but I know that at the very least, King Mswati should not continue to use his royalty as justification for leading a life of shameless extravagance, while his people live in abject poverty and perish at an alarming rate.

Bakassi: A Conflict for Land and Identity - But What Does This Reveal About Governance?

The situation in Bakassi Peninsula goes beyond that of land allocation, conflict over resources, or even development. It is clearly an issue of the effects that governance has on national identity.
The people of Bakassi have inhabitated an area that has been contested by Cameroon as theirs but claimed by Nigeria for decades. However, in 2002, after 15 years of political debate, the International Court of Justice awarded the land to Cameroon, much to the dismay of Nigeria and most of the inhabitants of Bakassi. On August 14, over 5 years after the court decision, the land was finally handed over to Cameroon.



The region was home to about 300,000 but in the months leading to the handover, over 100,000 people fled due to a desire to maintain their Nigerian citizenship as well as fear that during the hand over there would be violent clashes between Nigerian and Cameroonian factions in dispute over the handover. Though this fear was warranted due to a few skirmishes during the past year, on the actual day of the handover, things were relatively peaceful and the international community has congratulated both parties for the successful and most importantly peaceful implementation of the agreement.
But still, many residents of Bakassi are adamant about retaining their Nigerian citizenship. To the point that many of them have moved to overcrowded transit camps in Nigeria, abandoning their homes and businesses in Bakassi. In attempts to appease them, Nigeria began constructing a "New Bakassi", but this plan has been largely unsuccessful and even resulted in the displacement and destruction of homes and property of the original inhabitants of the land in an effort to make space for migrants from Bakassi.
This massive move of the inhabitants of Bakassi to Nigeria is a clear indication that their grievance with the handing over of the land is not rooted in their desire to occupy the assumingly oil rich peninsula and lucrative fishing economy, but rather feelings that they were betrayed by the Nigerian government (specifically former President Obasanjo) due to the ease in which they handed the land and thus the citizens over to Cameroon. The battle for land was in principle to those in Bakassi, a battle for the people who identified themselves as Nigerian.
Many Nigerian politicians as well as former community members of Bakassi have vowed to continue to contest the decision of the court even though the land has been handed over. However, the Cameroonian government and media has remained largely silent on the topic and assert that peace should be maintained in the region and Cameroonians and Nigerians should continue to coexist as they do along much of the border that they share.
I can't help but feel that the Cameroonian government is slightly embarrassed by how adamant the residents of Bakassi are about maintaining Nigerian citizenship. Perhaps this will give the government of Cameroon and impetus to investigate its treatment of its own citizens and why inhabitants of a neighboring village would rather become refugees than secure claim to their land. Sam Nuvala Fonkem compares the plight of Bakassi residents to that of Southern Cameroonians and the social division that developed after Cameroon's 1961 plebiscite, resulting in a longstanding political and economical marginalization of the group. Inhabitants of Bakassi have also expressed their fear of treatment they will receive from the Cameroonian government as well as the treatment they have witnessed of those living in parts of Bakassi, which had been previously ceded to Cameroon.
Ultimately, it is amazing how the creation of the nation state has developed identities- though officially controlled by its current inhabitors for less than 50 years- that are powerful enough to trump individuals' loyalty to land and history. During colonialism borders were so fluid and often changed without notice to the actual inhabitants. But today, we see country after country battling to rewrite borders that didnt exist during their initial inhabitance and were drawn by foreigners who no longer (and maybe never) inhabited it!

Cameroon Brings Home the Gold!

On Monday, Francoise Mbango Etone brought home the gold for Cameroon in the Triple Jump at the Beijing Olympics and set a new world record of 15.39. She also won the gold in 2004 at Athens. Congrats Francoise!!!

Africa is Not a Dumping Ground

The Agbobloshie dump site in Accra, Ghana is being consumed by old and broken computers shipped from abroad under the guise of second hand donations. The dumping ground is littered with broken glass, plastic, metal, and other dangerous and toxin computer parts that have been sent here for disposal. People are forced to tip toe around the area for fear of injuring themselves and the air is constantly covered in a thick black smoke as the computer parts burn.

The export of computer waste is banned internationally, but people are circumventing the law by labeling the junk as donations. However, 90% of the machines sent end up at the dump site where they contaminate the water and environment.

As the demand for the newest and savviest form of technology increases, more of the old is discarded and shipped to places that the rest of the world considers worthy of their junk. Greenpeace International has been exposing sites of what they call the "shady e-waste trade" and are calling for electronic companies to be responsible for recycling their used products. When we throw products out, materials should be returned back to the companies and maybe it will force them to come up with ways to recycle them rather than polluting communities overseas.

Kalibrados and Other Musicians Stand Up Against Xenophobia

Last Sunday there was a concert in Johannesburg, South Africa called, "Not In Our Lifetime", where Kalibrados an Angolan rap group and other musical acts performed to raise awareness of the negative impact of xenophobia. The proceeds from the concert will be used to support refugees and others victimized due to the xenophobic attacks that took place in May.

Here is a peak of Kalibrados' music.

Operation Return Home- If You Can Prove You Had One

A few months ago, I wrote about Operation Rudi Nyumbani, a government project aimed at returning IDPs to their homes. This project incorporated an element of compensation for those who had been displaced due to election violence. Upon hearing about this plan, my immediate concern was how the government would ensure that all citizens received their due compensation and those that were not displaced did not unduly benefit.
It seems as though Kenya has applied some very strict and seemingly unfair land laws in order to remedy this situation.
IDPs have been categorized as landowners, leaving those who can't prove land ownership with nowhere to go. However those that have been truly displaced including sharecroppers, squatters, and migrant workers are left in the camps to fend for themselves and are ineligible to benefit from government assistance.
Besides the fact that modern land policies should not be applied to traditional societies, all citizens affected by the political and economic conditions in Kenya, should be provided government assistance. They should not be forced to negotiate inane policies that only further exacerbate their current conditions. Kenya needs to immediately reassess the implementation of their return plan and ensure that citizens aren't once again left out in the cold, perpetuating a cycle of not only poverty, but aggressive and violent disdain for the government.