IS HILLARY CLINTON A SOLUTION?
Do you remember an article we did sometime back showing how poor leadership leads to poor economy as well as bad well being of citizens? One is left wondering, why is it that foreign leaders have to intervene always in Africa’s way of leadership?
I was particularly shocked by Raila Odinga who spoke before the arrival of Hillary Clinton saying that Africa does not need to be lectured about democracy because many people on the continent had fought against political oppression. I think he meant the opposite because while speaking at a conference that Clinton attended Raila totally agreed with her as she sharply criticized Kenya’s leadership for failing to implement reforms that were part of a power-sharing deal designed to end the postelection crisis, including not yet prosecuting anyone for the violence, as well as not doing enough to tackle corruption.
She was especially critical of a government decision not to appoint a special tribunal to look into the violence that erupted in early 2008. Instead, suspects have been tried in the country’s notoriously backlogged local courts, which many believe are not credible.
The U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton also criticized Kenya for rampant graft and corruption as she insisted that business and trade across Africa cannot grow without good governance and solid democracy. Kenyan Foreign Minister Moses Wetangula maintained that “reforms are on course that the war against impunity in the country is on, that the war against corruption is on.”
Kenyan officials have bristled at U.S. criticism of their reform efforts before, most notably when then-Sen. Barack Obama visited his late father’s native land in 2006 and warned that failure to address graft and accountability issues would damage the country’s credibility. Does this mean that foreigners must intervene for any African country to change it’s bad leadership style?