MALAWI: Life After Bingu's Death

On this date twelve months ago, Malawi lost it's president, the late Professor Bingu Wa Mutharika. Prior to his death, there was a nationwide outcry against the authoritarian style of his leadership. His own Vice-President had already expressed her opposition to the nepotism and tribalism by which he was shamelessly grooming his own brother to succeed him; Bingu responded by kicking her out of his party and excluding her from the business of governing. Religious leaders from the highly esteemed Public Affairs Committee (PAC) had already written a letter to him calling for him to reform his ways or resign; Bingu responded by ignoring them. Aid donors from western countries had already frozen aid to Malawi in protest to the unceremonious way in which he had deported the British ambassador for criticizing his dictatorial tendencies; Bingu told them to "go to hell". Ordinary citizens had already taken to the streets in protest against his regime; Bingu called them followers of the devil and ordered police to shoot them, killing 20 in the process. Outside of those who were either related to him or being paid to speak well of him, it's hard to think of anyone who was not lamenting Bingu's leadership and government. Even T.B. Joshua, the infamously self-proclaimed prophet from Nigeria, was making generic predictions that an African head of state was on the brink of death. As morbid as it sounds, it would not be inaccurate to say that when Bingu did die unexpectedly, most Malawians were...what's the word?... Relieved.  That ushered in the historical ascendancy of Joyce Banda to the presidency, making her Malawi's first female president. Now given the levels of discontent at that time, it is worth asking the million dollar question:  Is the state of the nation any better now than it was then?

The answer is yes and no. It is yes because now, when the people protest against their government as they did this year, the police shoot teargas instead of live ammunition. It is yes because now, the international community is open to helping and having diplomatic relations with Malawi again, as reflected by recent visits to Malawi by Christine Lagarde, the head of the International Monetary Fund, and Hillary Clinton in her capacity then as the American Secretary of State, not to mention Joyce Banda's own visits both to Europe and the White House. This show of international solidarity with Malawi was unheard of twelve months ago, and I dare say there is some good in having it. It is yes because now, business owners and members of Malawi's middle class are no longer spending half of every working day in half a mile long lines for fuel that may or may not be coming into the country. It is yes because now, Habiba Osman and her fellow activists are no longer being arrested for expressing dissenting views against the president. It is yes because now, businesses are no longer lamenting the lack of foreign currencies with which to order merchandise from abroad. It is yes because now, Patricia Kaliati's Ministry of Misinformation is gone, and one hopes for good.

But the answer is also no. It is no because now, the local currency three times weaker against the dollar than it was a year ago. In practice it means that it is three to five times more expensive to live in Malawi now than it was a year ago. It also means that people's salaries, which have not improved to weather the storm of inflation, are now worth half what they were worth a year ago. It is no because now, food security has been politicized and food aid has been personalized, leaving large numbers of Malawians scrambling for crumbs at poorly run and monitored state food reserves. It is no because now, Malawi has a president who has yet to show that she has the strength to stand up to western donors when they make demands that are sure to sink the poorest citizens further into poverty. It is no because now, Malawians' very survival is more dependent on aid and the government it has ever been. It is no because while access to fuel and forex was hindered by low supply a year ago, access to fuel and forex is still hindered now by high prices. It is no because now, we still have a president more anxious about garnering support for her party in preparation for the next election than she is about casting a vision that inspires and engages all Malawians in the business of nation building. It is no because now, we have a president who talks forgiveness and reconciliation one day and grinds her axe the next. It is no because now, Ralph Kasambara's Ministry of Selective Justice has began, under which public figures suspected of committing as serious a crime as treason are arrested and granted bail within the space of a week, while countless ordinary citizens rot in our jails for months without so much as a day in court to answer for petty crimes.

In this atmosphere, it is no wonder that Malawians are confused about what choice to make in next year's election. And when the future promises no better leadership, Malawians have the tendency to look to the past for better leadership, which is clear sign of despair. Malawians are in such despair that they imagine that Joyce Banda is a worse president than Bingu, just as they imagined that Bingu was worse than Bakili Muluzi who preceded him, and imagine further still that the three presidents we've had since the dawn of democracy have been worse than Kamuzu Banda who accorded Malawians none of the freedoms that they enjoy today. Our view of history is not the same as that held by the generation that fought for our nation's independence four decades ago. They rightly saw their past as filled with oppressive regimes, primitive ideas, and stifled freedoms. This does not mean they hated everything about their past, for they held on to the moral values and folk wisdom of their past. But they did not see the past as a better place than the future. Theirs was not a generation of despair. Ours is. We have such deep levels of dependence and despair that we easily think the past was better than the future. This, I believe, is why Peter Mutharika and Atupele Muluzi have such devout followers, because as the brother and son of two former presidents respectively, there is an illusion that the bright past will return. But the truth is that while the present is painful, the past was not bright either. 

What Malawi needs is not a leader who entrenches our false belief that we should go back to the past because the past was better, but a leader who inspires us to dream of a future we desire for ourselves and our children; a future that will not be brought into being by politicians who have an exaggerated view of their own indispensability, but which will be built when every citizen refuses to be given a cheap handout in exchange for a vote, and instead demands that they be called to action in building things that add value to our country; a future in which each citizen looks for ways to give to the nation rather than ways of taking from it; a future in which we as a people only ask for help when we have reached the limits of our own resources and abilities; a future in which the state works to make its citizens bigger instead of working to make the government and the president bigger. Such a future is brighter than the that past which some leaders are now promising to bring back, and I dare say it is also a future brighter than the present that we are being offered. There is no shortage of leaders complaining about the present and sugarcoating the past. But where are the leaders to paint a bright future for all Malawians, built by all Malawians? Where is the leader to denounce the spirit of despair with words spoken in the invincible language of hope?