The repugnant scent of recolonisation: Zambia’s complacency and USAFRICOM

By Richard Chomba

Africa’s former colonial masters, including their allies in her plunder, would have been foolish

If, after relinquishing direct political control over her sovereignty and over her natural resources, they faded into the shadows of global trade and industry, spheres of life they had dominated for years thanks to her raw materials and cheap labour.

Their lust for wealth and power was, and still is, insatiable, so, naturally, a plan was devised to perpetuate their dominance and Africa’s dependence on them. Anyone who stood in the way of this scheme was to be taken out of the way.

This they achieved through state sponsored coups, proxy wars as well as outright military invasions of foreign countries, and covert assassinations. Kwame Nkrumah, himself a victim of a CIA orchestrated coup, foresaw this, writing: “now that African freedom is accepted by all … as inescapable fact, there are efforts in certain quarters to make arrangements whereby the local populations are given token freedom while cords attaching them to the ‘mother country’ remain as firm as ever….

The intention is to use the new African nations, so circumscribed, as puppets through whom influence can be extended over states which maintain an independence in keeping with their sovereignty.

The creation of several weak and unstable states of this kind in Africa, it is hoped, will ensure the continued dependence on the former colonial powers for economic aid, and impede African unity.

This policy of balkanisation is the new imperialism, the new danger to Africa.”
Nkrumah’s words have come to pass.

The post-colonial era which has been characterised by the pillaging of African nations by more developed, more powerful, states, bears a stark resemblance to the colonial days. The hand of imperialism, in the background, controls the politics (through
self-centered, corrupt, politicians) and economies of African states. The peripheral political arena is a stage for opposing imperialist forces to battle it out for the control of raw materials and monetary flow in the countries in question. These forces were, largely the USSR and the USA (in collusion with the UK & other Western-European democracies) in the cold war period.

After the USA and its allies emerged victors of the cold war: after the fall of the Berlin war and
the disintegration of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR); a new foe for western interests was unveiling.

While they were preoccupied with the USSR, China had been rising. In the early 2000s through to the early 2010s, it became apparent to western neoliberals, that their clandestine exploitation of African states had been challenged by ‘modern imperial China’. Through the use of a USA-invented playbook on dominating African states, China financed much needed infrastructural projects, burdening developing African countries with too much debt than they are able to pay back, and thereby making African states beholden to Chinese influence in key sectors of the economy, and governance.

This, as one would imagine, has not sat well with the USA, the UK, Australia, the EU, and other US allies such as Japan and India, political and economic foes of China. Deliberate, and well coordinated, policies and steps to counter Chinese influence in Africa have since been taken by these countries.

As the US senate majority leader senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) said in 2021 during the senate’s passing of the US Innovation and Competition Act (a bill aimed at curtailing Chinese global dominance): “passing this bill… is the moment when the senate lays the foundation for another century of American leadership… this bill could be the turning point for American leadership in the 21st century… the world is more competitive now, than at any time since the end of the second world war. If we do nothing, our days as the dominant super-power may be ending. We don’t mean to let those days end on our watch! We don’t mean to see America becoming a middling nation in this century, we mean for America to lead it!”

The bill, as the name suggests, aims to maintain America’s superiority in tech and innovation globally, which has been challenged by China; or, in my view, it aims to simply regain it.

This fit,however, won’t be simple. All things considered, to say that China became the most superior country in the world in areas of technological innovation, manufacturing, construction, and global trade & finance; with the west paying a blind eye, would be foolhardy. Western countries, through their corporations and elites (the one-percenters) did in fact fund China’s rising.

In 1978, Chinese ‘paramount leader’ Deng Xiaoping, thought it was prudent if China was to become a force to be reckoned with in manufacturing, global trade and development. That is, if modern day China were to reclaim the past glory of ancient China – which was an economic and military force to reckon with – Chinese communism which had governed the Peoples Republic of China since its founding in 1949 by Mao Zedong (chairman of the Chinese Communist Party) needed to be modified. In order for China to become a prosperous communist state, Deng articulated, it had to
adopt some capitalist practices. He made reforms that would allow private ownership and private businesses. Special economic zones were set up in Shantou, Zhuhai, Xiamen, and Shenzhen. These small towns and villages, at that time, were now designated as capitalist havens in a communist republic.

They attracted vast amounts of capital, following these reforms, from western corporations and the “one-percenters”, owing to the cheap labour and low taxes and regulations that they provided. Deng’s little experiment was resounding a success. Now China, a country that was among the poorest in the world when he came to power, houses the second largest GDP in the world, and has become “the world’s factory”. China became rich, and the “one-percent” became even richer.

China started tunnelling its profits to the developing world to finance infrastructure development programmes, as was earlier alluded to, among other things, in a bid to gain leverage over the leaders of these nations who preside over raw materials that it desperately needs for its economic expansion.

This has worked well for China, and Africa has
continued to be exploited by foreign powers, with its leaders as accomplices. China simply used the western blueprint on how to rip-off Africa, to rip-off Africa. In fact, every other powerful country with a foothold on the continent uses a western invented system to exploit the good people of Africa, that is, through self-centered leaders. These leaders have no problem relinquishing their counties’ sovereignty through allowing foreign powers to set-up military bases, and military command offices, so long as they are promised funds for “development”, which they are then able to loot for themselves. They also see these outposts of foreign military installations as a means to safeguard their power. After taking a careful look at the world governance and economic system, and the “leaders” of this system – its chief architects – and how that this system subjugates African nations, perpetually; it begs the question: how did Africa’s colonisers and their allies in her plunder manage to subordinate African nations for this long, even after they gained the right to govern themselves? Well, a simple answer may be: they never intended to let go of Africa’s vast natural resources. It was theirs and theirs for good, and so was Africa: theirs to control, in all spheres.

As Lee Wengraf puts it in her book, ‘Extracting Profit’: through the structure of investments,

aid, loans, trade and trade policy; western governments – and if I might add: Eastern governments – Bretton Woods Institutions (the IMF and World Bank) and the pre-colonial imperialist as well as capitalist forces, acting collectively, perpetuated relationship dynamics
between the global elite, the “one-percenters”, and African states (developing countries) such as Zambia that abrogate the basic principles of fairness and equity.

These relationship dynamics between them, and the African political elite, are the same ones that existed during the colonial era: the country’s natural resources are ransacked, while a few vitiated indigenous black people, at the helm of local leadership, benefit.

In the independence era, colonialism gained a new name, it morphed into “the post-colonial era”. The underlying fundamentals set up by “the exploitative

coalition”, in 1944 at the Bretton Woods conference, only anchored, to quote senator Schumer, “American leadership” in this new era of sly white-collar thievery. A good majority of leaders of the African nationalist movements that fostered independence were the ‘spoiled children’ of the colonial era which preceded our token political independence. Most of them lacked a conscience, and were already in cahoots with imperial powers while they “fought for independence”. They understood their role as “puppet leaders” very well (lest we forget, this phenomenon of puppet African leaders started in the colonial days). These “patriots’” motive for gaining independence
was their need to sit – to bring it home – on top of the Zambian food chain: their insatiable lust for having more wealth and power, and their desire to control the finance attached to the national developmental agenda, as well as their fellow countrymen. They wanted to call the shots. They could read and write, while the majority couldn’t. Their education was meager compared to national leaders in the western world, but they were, nonetheless, highly educated compared to the rest of the populace, and so they became the aristocracy of Zambian society following our independence.

Post colonialism, just as Northern Rhodesia was oriented to supply “advanced nations” and the corporations within them with raw materials to feed their industrial needs, independent Zambia did not depart from that course which had detrimental effects to the environment, and little to no positive ramifications to the microeconomics of the majority of citizens (serve for a few politically tied individuals), as well as the macroeconomics of the country as a whole. The country continued to depend on foreign aid and started to entertain unsustainable debt, the “restructuring” of which only meant that the noose of foreign control of the nation’s economy and politics only became tighter. In Northern Rhodesia western bankers and trading companies would greatly benefit from financing and servicing of the mining sector, while mineworkers earned a meager income.

Nothing much has changed in present day Zambia. European, American, Chinese, Japanese and Indian capital, to mention but a few, pretty much runs the show today in not only the mining industry, but other facets of the economy too.

This is done openly and covertly – directly and indirectly – and always in collusion with complacent government leaders. Workers have continued to be exploited. Opposition political parties exist because they yearn to be the ones benefiting from the exploitation of our lands and our peoples, and not their counterparts with “the democratic mandate to rule”.

Democracy itself is a facade western leaders use to remove and install defiant and complaint national leaders to western interests, respectively. The global-east, specifically one-party China, makes use of democracy in countries such as Zambia in the same vein as western interests. We, therefore, now have a situation where different interests keen to take over the reins of power in our country fund their preferred puppets, to help subjugate the general populace, and specifically the local economy, under their control. One puppet leaves office, another swoops in.

Democracy saves western interests the hustle of having to fund proxy wars and covert assassinations to take out leaders who are antagonistic to their “good-for-the-world” agenda.

Leaders such as the DRC’s Patrice Lumumba, whose defiance and detest of western hegemony over the Congo’s vast natural
resources and economy were very deep-rooted and public. He proclaimed (shortly before his CIA facilitated assassination): “the Congo’s independence is a decisive step towards the liberation of the whole African continent…. I call on all Congolese citizens, men, women and children, to set themselves resolutely to the task of creating a national economy and ensuring our economic independence”.

Of course, the hawkish always justify their evil acts. Just like when they overthrew a democratically elected leader through a coup to install a puppet king, the Shah, who was sympathetic to western interests in Iran (Iranian oil), but yet repressive to his fellow citizens, or when the US secretary of state smiled and waved at cameras during the welcoming of a murderous despot – the current president of Equatorial Guinea: Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo – to Washington, a man who tortures his opponents like a barbarian, but nonetheless almost exclusively allows American companies to extract much of its $9 billion annual worth of oil and gas.

The latter came to power through a bloody coup in 1979 that toppled his uncle, Equatorial Guinea’s first head of state: Francisco Macias Nguema; and has been in power ever since. They, the US and its allies, have no problem in associating with Rwandese president, Paul Kagame, also a murderous dictator, famous for killing his opponents and repressing domestic dissent, and who’s been in power since 2000 through manipulation of the electoral system.

In apartheid South Africa, US capital would go in, and come out multiplied enroute to the United States, unremorseful of the horrors that the majority of black South Africans were experiencing at the hands of the apartheid regime.

Wengraf writes: “by the mid-1970s, US policymakers explicitly acknowledged the urgency of managing “political risk” vis-á-vis the apartheid regime so that US and white-South African capital retained “control of the richest and most strategically important part of Sub-Saharan Africa. Despite growing condemnation of apartheid rule, at the time, the value of US investment in South Africa was approximately one-third of its total investment in Africa and increased by 300 per cent from 1960 to 1975. Given the importance of this economic relationship, the United States was content to sidestep opposition to apartheid, despite the knowledge that “there was little evidence that US firms deliberately adopted a socially conscious policy of avoiding support of the South African government or its apartheid policies.”

Apparently, making money under oppressive regimes is for the greater good; that is: American greed. At the dawn of the independence error that followed shortly after the end of the second world war, there was a well-orchestrated strategy by the USA to forge political and economic bonds with the newly independent African states.

The goal for US policy at this time was to possess a greater advantage over the newly independent African nations – of course the foundation for this had already been set at the Bretton Woods conference – than their arch-rivals: the USSR; and also, Africa’s former colonisers – the Europeans (the aim here was to bypass them and reach the source of their much-desired raw materials directly and not through their allies: the colonialists).

In fact, the assassination of Patrice Lumumba in 1961, was a covert maneuver against, not just the DRC, but Marxist USSR too, and was seen as a necessary evil in the safeguard of America’s imperial interests in the DRC. What factors have led to Africa’s mass, as well as perpetual, plundering; that is, from the colonial days until now? Aside from imperial ambition, is the greed and self-interest exhibited by local leaders. Pre colonialism, colonial explorers, eager to obtain African land – rich in natural resources – for themselves, would entice African leaders with gifts such as fabric, beads, wine, whiskey, and mirrors.

That was enough, coupled with promises of more of such gifts, in certain instances, to sign off on property rights to the colonialists. Additionally, cowardice! Because of fearing white firepower, black leaders tended to easily give up natural resources for a fraction of their actual worth. So long as they benefited, it didn’t matter that the rest of the population continued to suffer without having their resources benefit them, or take them out of poverty.

Post colonialism, the majority of African leaders, especially those in power – or those allowed to be in power by the west – continue to entertain imperial interests for all the same reasons as their ancestors who allowed colonialism to flourish.

The independence era paved way for the subtle
recolonisation of Africa by western, as well as eastern, powers. Always in on the plot to ransack Africa has been the African political elite. Selfishness and cowardice characterise Africa’s bourgeoisie till this very day.

This is the unspoken truth, even when they stand before local audiences claiming they want to develop the country. Those who would genuinely want to develop local communities, prioritising local control of the economy, are taken out. Despots who give priority to western demands are left in their power sits, up to several decades in some cases.

It’s surprising how comfortable government leaders are with this status-quo – well maybe it’s not so surprising seeing as only they, and not the larger society, benefit from treaties made with “Africa’s owners”! This is very appalling to anyone with a live moral compass.

Recently in Zambia, news surfaced concerning the setting up of USAFRICOM offices at the US Embassy in Lusaka. Some called it a military base. Clarity then came from the US Embassy that what’s being set up is an “Office of Security Cooperation”.

Due to failure by both parties to not make public the contents of the MoU between Zambia and the US DoD, such confusion was to
be expected – and, knowing both parties involved, maybe they deliberately hid the details so as to have a last word about the said offices, thereby controlling the final narrative that would stick in people’s heads, while making the real intent of such an office classified.

Be that as it may, what is USAFRICOM? What’s the purpose of setting up shop in Zambia? Wouldn’t it have been more prudent to have held a consultative meeting with all stakeholders before agreeing to the establishment of these ‘offices’? Whose interests does USAFRICOM aim to serve? Is it imperial interests?

The United States Africa Command, or USAFRICOM, is one of eleven Unified Combatant Commands (CCMD) of the United States Department of DefenCe (US DoD). The CCMD is a joint military command, and each command is composed of units from at least two of the six branches of the US Armed Forces: Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Space Force and Coast Guard. Together, the Unified Combatant Commands oversea at least 750 outposts, or military bases, of the US DoD globally, in at least 80 countries.

It costs the US taxpayers an estimated $80 billion to construct and service military bases, as well as pay US military service members stationed on these bases, annually. Each unit of the Unified Combatant Command conducts extensive and continuous missions in its area of operation. Units of the CCMD are organised either on a geographic or a functional basis. USAFRICOM, as the name suggests, is a unit of the CMMD that conducts its operations on the African continent.

USAFRICOM’s military operations on the continent include helping African governments and their militaries fight regional conflicts and maintaining military relations with 53 African nations which don’t include Egypt (that falls under the United States Central Command). The major factors that define USAFRICOM’s operations on the continent are: “the growing threat of international terrorism”, safeguarding the USA’s oil, gas, and mineral interests; and the Sino[1]Africa relations that have been forged-strong in the last 22 years. USAFRICOM’s strategy, according to General Carter F. Ham (retd), is “to strengthen democratic institutions” and “boosting broad-based economic growth”. Currently, USAFRICOM is headquartered at Kelley Barracks in Stuttgart, Germany.

Certain high ranking, current and retired, US army officers have, however, stressed the merits of having a section of USAFRICOM staff headquartered on the continent, claiming it would be a positive factor in aiding USAFRICOM to better execute its programmes. Cognisant of the political backlash, and controversy, attached with the notion of setting up a headquarters of a branch of the US Army’s combatant division on the continent, then president of America, George W Bush (who has mining interests in North Western Province of Zambia), claimed no large-scale US military base would be set up to house USAFRICOM’s headquarters on the continent (though Camp Lemonnier that houses some 2,300 US Army servicemen exists in Djibouti, but is nonetheless not the USAFRICOM HQ), rather, a network of “cooperative security locations” at which “temporary activities” would be conducted seemed like a more viable option.

It has been reported that several African countries such as Liberia and Nigeria have in the past been competing to house USAFRICOM headquarters because it comes with a lot of financial incentives to the host nation, or government politicians.

At the same time, several nations have been opposed to the setting up of a USAFRICOM HQ on African soil. These include South Africa, and Libya.

Seeing as the government of the Republic of Zambia has agreed, without first engaging the general public through various stakeholders, to house this “office of security cooperation”, (which is a part of a larger network of “cooperative security locations” on the continent), it’s only safe to conclude that this hasn’t been done for the mutual benefit of our two countries.

Three entities are involved here, one stands to benefit more, the other will benefit slightly, the other doesn’t benefit at all – these are: US interests in Africa, Zambia and the region; Zambian government politicians; and the people of Zambia, respectively.

US military offices, in whatever form, do come with an influx of money to the hosts that house them, and it’s apparent here that the people in charge of our government want to reap something for themselves.

Personally, I find it discouraging to galvanise around national leaders that are comfortable with defeat, with being willful accomplices in aiding and abetting an imperial power to be “great for the next 100 years”, implying we, as a country and continent, will remain subdued by it for the next 100 years, and that we’ll get caught up in the cross fire for the battle over our natural resources between this power and its arch rivals, and that our people will remain poor while a few politicians get richer – that is, if nothing is done to rectify the situation. I actually find it disgusting.

This work isn’t a review of the UPND’s first 10 months in power, that will come later on. It’s the author’s thoughts on neocolonialism, imperialism, and the leadership vacuum that exists in resisting them.

Note: thoughts espoused in this op-ed are the author’s and do not reflect the worldview of the publishing entity in any way!

The author is a Pan-African socialist and serves as a research assistant – International
Relations, at Amini Center for Policy Research – a youth led public policy think-tank. Email: richard.chomba@acpr.org, phone +260 975 559420

richardchomba3@gmail.com

By Kombe Mataka

ACTIVIST Laura Miti says she is amazed by how many people are expecting to get jobs from President Hakainde Hichilema because they worked to ensure there is change of government.
Miti said when she featured on ZNBC’s Sunday Interview Programme that it was unfortunate that some people were even angry, bitter and vowed they would have the President removed in 2026 because they did not get a job.
“What seems to amaze is the number of people that feel they should have jobs because UPND is in government. Which trenches? The point is you cannot demand a job. None of us deserve a job. What we should all expect when we have a new government is that they should improve the conditions for the majority. Improve education, improve employment. One person cannot say ‘I should get a job so that my family should live well’. We even have the general public saying ’that one was not rewarded’. Why should they be rewarded? The President owes no one a job. The President should appoint the best of us as citizens. Some of them never did nothing and just lived their lives but they are the best,” Miti said. “Let us work hard to ensure the bottom is lifted and so that there is less hunger and more employment.
I am one of those people who the day I die people will be saying ‘ata, that is me!’ You know how we laugh at people when they die. We laugh at how they did not have anything.”
And Miti said it was not true that she was propagating gay rights to get funding.
“I am not pushing for gay rights. To have gay rights you have to put them in the Constitution. I don’t think we should. I don’t think we are ready. If you look at the Western constitutions it took them 100 years to get to a point where they could put gay rights in the constitution. My point is we must not put people in jail. Let us make small movements. By small movements, for me is you cannot break down hotel rooms. All the people who go in prison they had private relationships. It is two consenting adults doing what they are doing. All I ask for is they should not be put in jail,” she said. “So we should change the law and not make this criminal. Let us decriminalise it. I could never be paid to say something I don’t believe in. For me I don’t pursue wealth. I don’t want to be rich. I don’t just have a kind of mind. Let me tell you what we should be dealing with which breaks my heart. Sex problem we have in the country is non-consensual sex – young girls and even girls of the age of consent routinely have sex they don’t want because they are looking for a job. Because they are trying to enter the police and hierarchical offices. We have girls raped by their uncles, raped by their parents and issues are being resolved at home because we seem to understand a man having sex whenever he wants to. We have so many broken people.”
Miti added: “What I am saying is as a country, we are very myopic. The things that affect us like poverty, the issues of extreme abuse of girls, especially young police officers, we are not dealing with this…instead of putting people in jail.”
Miti warned the UPND should not dare Zambians because they were more alert after their experience with the PF.
“The UPND had better not mess with this public, it is much more alert. It is much more inquiring and the reason for this is those scandals that we went through,” she said.
Miti said civil society players must not seek recognition.
“Civil society leaders are never meant to become heroes or heroines. They shouldn’t be. It is a bit of a problem. I cannot be running around thinking of myself as a hero. I have a job and I have a space within which to do it and that is what it is. It is not building heroes. It is more important to build a country that can speak for itself, analyse issues, and hold government to account but in terms of whether we become friends with those in office, I would not say so,” she said. “The current government I don’t know whether it is a friend of civil society to the extent that we cannot speak about them. Nothing has changed for me in the way I engage this government with the last. The only difference is this government does not throw out scandals everyday as we had in the last seven years. In the last seven years, it was firefighting every single day. Asking that the civil society should be standing on a hill and screaming when there is no problem is problematic.”
Miti, who has been appoint commissioner of the Human Rights Commission, said the position is the best anyone in civil society can be appointed to because it is not a job.
“It is not a salary position. If you remember, the Human Rights Commission was the strongest remaining voices that were able to hold the last government to account. We had FIC (Financial Intelligence Centre) and the Auditor General reports. A commissioner is like you…You get your commission from your day’s job. You do not swear allegiance to the President. The President should not expect you to have allegiance to him or anyone in government. The only reason I accepted that position was because it absolutely does not in any way interfere to think, my ability to do what I believe is my job right now,” she said. “It is on the demand side; it is not on the supply side. You are not government. If this government is at all imagining that it will be allowed to harm the nation it will not. And it will not because of them or us, it will be because the nation is larger than us. If anyone in power begins to harm the nation they must account.”
Asked how she reacted to criticism from people bordering on her personal life, Miti said, “I don’t know what people say about me”.
“I just don’t go beyond my page and so it took me time to understand how far what I write goes. In my mind I write for a small audience and then people will take them and spread them. I almost never follow them. I am in a very few WhatsApp groups. I am put in a WhatsApp group and I leave,” said Miti. “On my page I just don’t allow people that would go for my person or attack someone’s person. I block them immediately. My page is very interactive. You find some very intellectual debates. The reason why that is possible is because people can disagree about the topic. For me there are two things that don’t define me, that don’t affect me – praise and criticism. I believe that as a country we must speak about things that affect us together.”

By Oliver Chisenga

THE Judiciary has for a long time been choking the justice delivery system, says Southern Africa Network against Corruption (SANAC) executive director Gregory Chifire.

Commenting on the removal of Sunday Nkonde from the office of judge of the High Court, Chifire said the country is confident that there shall soon be change in the Judiciary.

“Actually, we expected the President to go the Kenya route where all the positions in the Judiciary were frozen and fresh applications called. However, whatever route is taken as long as it bears fruits is welcome,” he said.

Last Friday, President Hakainde Hichilema, acting on recommendations contained in a report presented to him by the Judicial Complaints Commission, removed Nkonde from the office of judge of the High Court of Zambia.
Chifire described the process that President Hichilema has started to cleanse the Judiciary by removing erring judges as a step in the right direction.

Chifire has been in exile since the Supreme Court sentenced him to six-years imprisonment on charges of contempt in November 2018 but was recently pardoned by President Hichilema.
He had called for an investigation into potential judicial corruption involving one of the largest banks in the country and it is believed he was targeted as a result of this.

While welcoming Nkonde’s removal as judge, Chifire however said his prayer was that more would be done.
“Actually we expected the President to go the Kenya route where all the positions in the judiciary were frozen and fresh applications called. However, whatever route is taken as long as it bears fruits is welcome. And we are confident that in no time, there shall be change in the judiciary,” Chifire said. “It is an open secret that the happenings in the judiciary don’t inspire confidence. There is too much corruption in the judiciary to such an extent that judgments are either for sale or delivered on political lines. Some of us know these things.”
Chifire alleged that some judges and magistrates use cleaners, court clerks, marshals, interpreters, secretaries, and others to solicit bribes.
He added that some judges were promoted on partisan lines.

“And we know them. As such, we can’t continue to have such a Judiciary. Zambia needs to start breathing again. The Judiciary has for a long time been choking the justice delivery system. A society cannot survive with a compromised judiciary such as the one we currently have. We need speedy judicial reforms. That is the only way that will bring back public confidence in the judiciary,” he said.
Chifire said judicial officers must be above reproach.

“But in the recent past, we have seen rogue magistrates and judges. We have heard of magistrates and judges soliciting bribes from suspects. We have heard rumours of magistrates and judges receiving gratifications from parties involved in a case. This is extremely disheartening,” he said.

Chifire said time had come for the restoration of dignity in Zambia’s courts.
He said Zambians are yearning for judicial, constitutional, electoral and other reforms.
“That is one of the reasons why Zambians voted for change. They wanted change in every sphere of governance. Every effort to achieve that purpose such as the one that the President has embarked upon is welcome,” said Chifire.

By Ernest Chanda

PF NATIONAL chairperson Davies Chama has challenged President Hakainde Hichilema to act on the Mahogany Airline saga where government chartered a plane for US $275,000 without receiving a service.
He said the ruling UPND are dealers, “and deceptions and lies are manifesting themselves to make sure that the truth will always come out. God is exposing them in a bigger way.”

On Friday last week, the Ministry of Sport was frantically organising a plane to carry the Zambia national team players back home immediately after their game against Ivory Coast on the night of the same day.
This was after Mahogany Airline chief executive officer Dr Jim Belemu went mute after being paid a full US $275,000 a couple of days before the day of departure, a service that he failed to provide.

The 120-seater plane was to carry sports minister Elvis Nkandu, his permanent secretary Kangwa Chileshe, director of sport John Zulu, FAZ general secretary Adrian Kashala, a number of government officials and supporters including journalists to Yamoussoukro where Zambia dated Cote d’ Ivoire in the AfCON qualifier match which kicked off at 21:00 hours. Zambia lost 3-1.

The team was supposed to return immediately after the match in good time for a second encounter against the Comoros billed for Heroes Stadium in Lusaka today.

The plane was scheduled to depart Kenneth Kaunda International Airport on Thursday at 20:00 hours but time kept changing until Dr Belemu’s phone could no longer be reached from midnight till Friday morning, leaving the travelling party in suspense and resulting in all of them spending a night in the freezing Kenneth Kaunda International Airport premises.

Nkandu and Chileshe then took the matter into their own hands as time was desperately running out on them and made contacts and finally managed to find a much bigger 250-seater plane through Proflight which was costing US $225,000.
Dr Belemu’s 120-seater plane was even more expensive by $70,000.

Later on Saturday, Dr Belemu disputed the amount indicated by Nkandu and Kangwa while attributing the non-delivery of service to a fault on his plane.
“I have observed so many gaps and incorrect reported statements from the media. I don’t even know where the amount stated in the media as payment to us is coming from as it is incorrect. Perhaps it will be interesting to know how the amount mentioned was arrived at,” said Dr Belemu. “We have always conducted such assignments both within the country and in other neighbouring countries, sometimes in difficult and tight situations. We also prioritise the confidentiality on movements of national team and its officials. We always prioritise integrity in whatever services we do and we remain focused.”

But Chama said President Hichilema should tell the nation what his government will do about “their own supplier who has supplied air”.
“They have been saying PF allowed people who supplied air. This is what this government has been complaining about to the Zambian people. They accused suppliers under our government of supplying air. And now their own cadre Belemu has supplied air at a time when we have no resources in the economy,” Chama said. “I am challenging President Hakainde Hichilema to tell the nation what he will do to his permanent secretaries at Cabinet Office who processed and approved this payment. How do you spend $275,000 to just go and watch football for 90 minutes and you come back? The President should tell the nation what he will do about this scandal where his own government pays money to someone who does not deliver. Are they going to recover this money or are they going to blacklist Belemu the same way they have blacklisted contractors who dealt with the PF government? Their own cadre has also delivered air. So I don’t expect the President to keep quiet about this because he has been preaching prudence and transparency in his government.”
Chama charged that the government was being deceptive in its dealings.

He wondered why the government opted for an expensive Mahogany Airline when there was a cheaper offer from Proflight.
“These are a bunch of people who are very deceptive. If anything, they are dealers because they are giving those contracts in the night under the cover of darkness. They could have gone to other airlines who are much cheaper because we are told that in their desperate situation in order for them to come out, there was even a cheaper offer. And these figures have been floating around,” Chama said. “They are being exposed. You know, deceptions and lies are manifesting themselves to make sure that the truth will always come out. God is exposing them in a bigger way. Of course, the deal was done in the night under the cover without even tender. That amount, it’s a very huge amount. In terms of authority to procure, I think it’s beyond the threshold. $275,000 just to go and watch football? That’s too much.”
Chama reminded the UPND administration of their claims about accountability.
He said what they had done was contrary to their claims.

“And this is a government that has been saying they will not tolerate wasteful expenditure. And we are under a very tight economic situation. And they are supposed to make sure that they protect every cent that comes into the coffers of government. Now, they are being exposed that this is a very wasteful government,” said Chama. “$275,000 can complete a school and make it habitable to even employ teachers and a lot more civil servants. They want to hide that they are very prudent and very rational leaders. But, thank God, because of being stranded now they are being exposed. And we are going to know how they gave $275,000 to that man who is their supporter, who is their cadre. And these are some of the issues that the investigative wings, if they are really impartial, they are supposed to be looking at.”

By Richard Luo in Sinda

FORMER Milanzi PF member of parliament Whiteson Banda says there is too much disorganisation in his party.

Asked if he still believed the PF could form government again, Banda refused vehemently.

“I was PF MP but I’m disappointed with PF. PF for now can’t form government unless they put their house in order. It’s not possible because there is too much disorganisation in it,” Banda said.

Meanwhile, Banda has asked the UPND government to take the fight against corruption seriously instead of shaming itself.

In an interview, Banda expressed sadness at the development where the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) seized properties from two former ministers but later released them.

“We support the fight against corruption but the government should not be vindictive. The corruption process should be properly undertaken,” he said.

Banda urged the government to ensure anyone who plundered public resources should pay back.

He said the economy was not good and if money stolen was brought back, the economy could be boosted.

“The economy is not okay. Prices of commodities are still high. Fuel prices are still high. People were so expectant that if they usher in power this government, things will change. But we didn’t know what was ahead of us, like the war in Ukraine which has really affected our economy,” Banda added. “The fight against corruption should be real. Those that plundered should make sure they bring back the monies because those monies belong to the people. I have been an MP for about 10 years in a rural constituency and I know what people need. If someone plundered our money, what will our people do on the developments they need?”

Banda said Zambians needed the stolen money for more development.

He has also challenged the government to balance up the economy, adding that “if it remained like this for the next three years, then people may vote UPND out”.

“If the next two years the government fails to work on the economy, the commodities are still high, to me it means the government has failed and I can foresee that they will only work for five years,” said Banda.