WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.
Original Post Date: 2010-04-05 Time: 19:00:02 Posted By: News Poster
By Skue Kapanda Marenga
I was prompted to enter the debate about the make of the new Cabinet, after realising that these analysts who have a virtual monopoly over the print and other media have lost touch with the objective conditions prevailing in our country.
This is one of the reasons why debates in the print and news media have become so monotonous and lack objective analysis.
Also, that these analysts have failed to make an informed analysis of the choices that the President was faced with and thereby exposing a fundamental misunderstanding of the forces at play and the objective conditions prevailing in our country.
Furthermore, one would have expected them to base their analyses on the performance of government ministries which should have warranted drastic changes or overhauling a winning team that continues to enjoy the confidence of the executive of our country.
Their main position is that the make-up of the new Cabinet is a step backwards in that it is a recycled team with old ideas that would not offer anything new in terms of leadership.
The majority of these analysts mask their inability to provide an objective analysis by hiding behind phrases such as “mere filling of vacancies a cabinet reshuffle and that the president is a shadow of the former”. This type of phraseology is not helpful in informing our readers as to why His Excellency the President has made those choices. The readers are also not told who would have presented a better choice and in what position.
Graham Hopwood had the right spectacles on when he stated: “the new Cabinet is reflective of the democratic process, the voting patterns and the need to retain a winning team”. This is what I would call a systematic analysis of the new Cabinet.
The most basic definition of politics is that politics is about the redistribution of resources. The main reason the voting public participate in the political life of a country is to gain access to resources such as education, health, water, land, housing, etc.
To achieve this, they elect a person whom they believe would ensure delivery of public goods and services to them.
By accepting to let the President enter into a social contract with the citizens of the country and in order to deliver on that contract, he has to assemble a team of loyal, committed and skillful people that will help him provide leadership to the country.
As someone elected directly by the public, just like in any modern democracy, the President has the sole prerogative to put together a team to assist him in governing the country.
As democrats, we should respect his choices and accept that the authority to rule the country was determined democratically and accords the process the legitimacy it deserves.
Otherwise, we risk being accused of trying to run the country through the backdoor. Of course, I am mindful of the fact that an appeal contesting the verdict of the High Court on the outcome of the last Presidential and National Assembly elections has been lodged with the Supreme Court, and therefore it is premature for me to express myself on this issue at this stage.
In my opinion, Pohamba has announced a changed Cabinet, it is a balanced and skillful team that combines experience with loyal and youthful cadres. It is a winning combination that would consolidate the gains made since independence and ensure that the Swapo Party Manifesto is implemented to the letter.
It is this very team that has articulated Vision 2030 for our country and infusing it with new and young blood was the right prescription.
It is a transformational Cabinet that has replaced some of the tested cadres of our movement with youthful ones and has set the process of succession planning into motion.
The same can be said about the composition of the National Assembly, in that we see more youthful comrades who were considered outsiders making it to parliament.
It is the start of a process of gradual transfer of power to younger cadres who are loyal, committed and skilled to ensure the implementation of the Swapo Party manifesto and Vision 2030.
The groundwork was laid for the next generation of leaders. The infusion of young and skilled blood into the executive team of our country signals predictability and certainty about Namibia’s future.
It is a process of mentoring and coaching young leaders to take over one day and in some circles is referred to as succession planning.
In other words, Swapo Party leadership is being strategic because they have a vision of who the next generation of leaders should be. Model democracies such as Singapore, Malaysia, China and Botswana have gone down this route and today they are the envy of many.
We should be mindful that Pohamba is also the president of Swapo Party and believes in collective leadership and there is nothing wrong for a democrat to consult other senior colleagues within the party for advice.
What is farfetched is to call him “a shadow of the former”. It exposes dislike for teamwork and the principle of collective leadership.
Democratic centralism requires that the ruling party should provide direction to the government of the day and hence the ruling party should provide overall guidance in terms of policy and programmes.
This is the practice in many established democracies and those not comfortable with this notion would be forgiven for their ignorance on how democracies operate.
Swapo Party leaders in particular and Namibian leaders in general are a rare breed in Africa. We are one of the few countries in the whole world where popular and tested leaders decide that it is time for them to make way for younger colleagues and to notice that those who could not make it to parliament and Cabinet bow out gracefully is a sign of political maturity. I was moved by this patriotic gesture.
Indeed, Namibia has come of age. All of us in government, private and civil society should emulate this example and decide that it is time for us to hand over to a younger generation of leaders.
Some of these very critics have been holding on to their positions in their organisations since time immemorial, whilst calling for a transfer of power to younger generations. This is hypocrisy of the highest order and treacherous to the agendas of their organisations.
I concede that it is a patriotic duty and a constitutional obligation of every Namibian to render constructive criticism on how government business is managed.
However, I am concerned by some analysts, for reasons known to themselves, that are at every opportunity, trying to paint Namibia as a country that lacks leadership, where the rule of law is non-existent, basic freedoms are under threat, where corruption and crime are rampant and very little development and progress is noticeable.
In fact, some analysts maintain no objectivity in their criticism of an elected leadership. It takes outsiders to notice that Namibia has a shining democracy and that she has made great progress towards the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals.
As a matter of fact, the very team that we are referring to as a recycled team is credited internationally for formulating some of the best policies in the world.
The biggest problem facing our nation is the implementation of these good policies. As analysts we should contribute constructively by dissecting the issues hampering the implementation of policies.
I am suggesting that we start focusing on the systems, processes, technological or human capital which are hampering delivery.
Of course, I am mindful that there are areas that require more attention, such as the diversification and transformation of the economy, value addition to the agricultural sector, black economic empowerment, food security, water and sanitation, land reform (absentee lands), quality education, etc. However, these challenges are not insurmountable.
As analysts our services would be most valued if we focus on the issues that would translate into an improvement in the lives of our people.
As patriotic citizens we should at all cost protect and promote Namibia’s image as a flourishing democracy, enjoying peace, democracy and development.
We should enrich political debate with constructive criticisms and suggest alternatives to the policy choices embarked upon by the executive.
African intellectuals have a habit of resigning from the political life of their countries by being ever negative and shy of being associated with their countries’ progress or lack thereof.
We owe it to future generations to enlighten intellectual debate within our parties, work environments and the country in general.
I have noticed that Namibia’s best brains spend too much of their time in churches at the expense of contributing to the educational and intellectual life of their country. It is here where the role of party think tanks and research units within government ministries would play a critical and pivotal role.
Initiation and innovation are the critical phrases as we embark on our journey to Vision 2030. Government should establish funds dedicated to research and development within ministries as a way of promoting innovative thinking and nurturing a culture of research.
Similarly, development projects and programmes need to receive due attention of government public relations and publicity units with a view to inform the wider public of how Namibia has developed in the last 20 years.
Skue Kapanda Marenga is a former trade unionist, student leader
Original Source: 
Original date published: 1 April 2010
Source: http://allafrica.com/stories/201004050829.html?viewall=1