I join Sister Sigga Jagne in her call for the opposition to accept
Ambassador Perrott’s offer. If anything, and despite my stated opposition to
elections being held under the present conditions, an international presence
during the elections would help a lot in ensuring the integrity of the
process remains if it still has any of that left. Notice here that the APRC
will decline this offer under the pretext that such a gesture is
quasi-imperialist. Indeed, when the offer was extended way back in 1996,
Jammeh’s dim-witted reply was why Britain never asks for international
supervision of her elections? Impervious to the virtual reality that no
opposition, at any rate in the West, has any cause to cry foul from vote
riggings perpetrated by the incumbency. So the opposition needs to start
ball rolling. Expect the APRC and indeed, Jammeh himself to attempt to decry
and or block the participation of international observers in the 2001
elections. The 2001 elections are a make-or-break for the Gambia; if Jammeh
loses and there exist evidence that he did  tampers with the votes, it will
turn ugly for he won’t get away with it. Gambians simply don’t have that
amount of patience. The opposition therefore, with the hindsight of 1996,
needs to marshalling, strategizing and above all agitate for a playing field
that is level enough to ensure free and fair elections.
I, however, wish to take the Ambassador on his lame defence of the current
British policy of resuming military co-operation and or assistance with the
Gambia gov’t. The Ambassador’s assertion that “'We are very pleased to send
a Gambian officer cadet to Sandhurst, which I think is what people were
talking about. If such criticisms should come six years after the coup, then
I would say to those people that a course at Sandhurst involves training
soldiers to be leaders, better soldiers and exponents of human rights,” is
not only self-defeatist when wrestled with Britain’s “ethical” foreign
policy and the development needs of the ordinary peoples of the Gambia, but
insensitive to the silent traumas of the grieving families and friends of
all those who lost either lost lives or severely injured in the April
Massacres. The timing of the announcement of the resumption of the change in
policy couldn’t have come at worst period. A period when the nation is still
trying to come to terms with the security forces callously slaughtering
children as young as three with live bullets? Let me put this as simple as
possible: Soldiers open live bullets on school children murdering 15 of them
and without the culprits facing the music, the British gov’t announces it is
resuming military co-operation with the administration that gave such
orders? This is simply a very insensitive move on the part of a country like
Britain. You cannot claim to symphatesize with victims of the April murders
and then in the thick of that - with the memories still fresh on peoples
minds - you announce that you are helping to bolster the morale and
logistics of the apparatus that carried out such heinous crimes. That is
just akin to a legislator going to a funeral where the deceased was murdered
with a gun and announcing that he/she will be legislating laws that will
liberalise gun laws whilst people are still mourning. That is not only
outrageous, but equally insensitive to the mourning friends and families of
the deceased. And another thing: The Ambassador’s claim that training at
Sandhurst transforms soldiers into “exponents of human Rights” makes a
mockery of Sandhurst trained loose canons like the Singhateh brothers and
other perpetrator of gross human right abuses in the Gambia. Above all, if
Britain cares for the well-being of ordinary folks in the Gambia, she should
concentrate her energies on training more doctors, nurses, agriculturists,
engineers, and the whole package. These in my view would help far more in
our drive to develop our country than the training of another would-be
Jammeh. For with historical hindsight, we can see that when Jammeh was being
trained in the USA for his cadet course, the Americans also had in mind
“training soldiers to be leaders, better soldiers and exponents of human
rights” and ended up training a kleptomaniac, murderer, a crack-pot and
everything pre-historic in governance.
In conclusion, I appeal to the UK gov’t, and in particular to the conscience
of the Labour Party to have a rethink on resuming military assistance with a
crack-pot like Jammeh. In the final analysis, with every brutality
perpetrated on innocent Gambians and as the Gambia slides towards the abyss,
resuming military assistance with Jammeh is to work against the interests,
sensitivities and norms of the very ordinary folks the Ambassador wants to
help. Military co-operation with the Gambia at this peculiar stage of her
checkered history and most importantly, with someone like Jammeh, is
stupendously outrageous and insensitive to the plight of the grieving
families and friends of the April 10th and 11th victims.
Hamjatta - Kanteh


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------