In a message dated 9/10/2006 12:54:22 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Gunjur writes: Brother Sidibeh, You wrote: "NADD could have evolved into a society-oriented politcal movement, i.e a political instrument that reorganises society as a way of changing the state; as opposed to a state-based politcal group - which have invariably failed everywhere in Africa. NADD could have forever altered the nature of politics in Gambia!" In deed this is true and that is why we Gambians are so heartbroken over the disintegration of the coalition with all the possibilities it held for our people at this critical hour and I cannot imagine for one moment that those who tossed it into the gutter in exchange for self and personal interest can have the interest of our people at heart and I believe that no amount of negotiation will bring them back to the table. They are marching to the tune of a different drummer. If a decision can be made to abandon the idea of a coalition at this critical juncture, we cannot waste time on worrying about the fragile egos of those who cannot withstand the heat of scrutiny because of two reason, they are aspiring for political office for the wrong reason which in turn does not serve the interest or purpose of the aspiration or the people, and scrutiny will certainly reveal them for what they are, self centered and self perpetuating and those are not the qualifications to fill the position. Any unrealistic notions of a reconciliation are just that, unrealistic notions because it has been abundantly clear that reconciliation is not on the agenda in view of all that has transpired and in view of all of the weak and untruthful and insincere excuses that have been rendered. Therefore, we should desist from the fallacy that reconciliation is a possibility now or in the future. It is clear that the UDP/NRP etc want reconciliation only according to their own terms, that they have the leadership, and without the term limit as outlined in the NADD agreement, even if this ensures that the APRC remain in power and it is against the interest of the people to continue to encourage such modes of thinking. It is a condition that is counter to the ideal of the NADD agreement and it is therefore an effort that was devised to abandon the original agreement and resort to force the hands of others after having signed on to the original agreement. It is most insincere and anyone who has the interest of our country at heart knows that what is needed now is not only to dislodge the APRC regime, but most importantly, to put into place an interim government that will bring about the needed reforms. The UDP/NRP does not subscribe to this idea, they just want power at any cost, the same as Yaya Jammeh does instead of sacrificing personal gain for the welfare of Gambians. We cannot afford to encourage that at all and they will never abandon those aspirations and all they have said so far is proof of this. So we will continue to inform the people about those who betray their interest. You also wrote: "Mr. Darboe, of course, deserves much respect, but the party he leads, I thought even then, came to be the natural abode of disgruntled politicians and businessmen made homeless by APRC purges of the PPP and NCP. It posesses neither the ideological conviction nor the organizational tradition to carry the struggle for power beyond mere protest against corruption and the excesses of an egoistic political elite feeding on the spoils of power. It cannot control and alter the role of institutions even if it assumes state power. This conclusion brings me to the reason I think the coalition is of major importance" I will add that the UDP is not only "a natural abode of disgruntled politicians and businessmen made homeless by APRC purges of the PPP and NCP" as you rightly stated, it is also a natural abode for the corrupt and inept former PPP officials with their trademark nepotism and tribalism and their use of these sentiments to divide our people and exploit them to satisfy their own quest for personal power, a quest in which the welfare of our people do not feature at all. You also wrote: "But where other variables such as unprincipled rivalry, vanity, ethnic identity, acquisitiveness, fear and even populism sway voter sentiments greatly, violent criticism is often taken personally. The effect is that the prospects for a future confluence of opposition parties becomes more remote than formerly" My response to this is that it is time that we stop babysitting the politicians who are driven by nothing but self interest because you see, the process is not about feeding any single individual's ego, but it is about the search for the most qualified to lead in all the aspects that qualification has to be measured by. It is about educating the people so that we can free them from the bondage of being used as pawns by unscrupulous politicians in search of personal power alone and who neither posses nor have the capabilities nor the conviction to put the interest of the people first. In-fact, we cannot afford to feed their vanities and lack of self confidence anymore, and if any politician takes criticism by the people personally, they are definitely in the wrong business and need to respectfully excuse us because we are not looking for a sovereign who is above reproach. We the People are looking for someone to fill a position and they will be scrutinized to see if they are qualified for the Job. I think too often, some of us tend to forget this small but very significant fact. It is time to start educating our people to choose according to these ideals instead of continuing to feed the vanities of the wrong people "just for the time being". We have to choose between the welfare of our people and our country and worrying about politicians taking criticism personally and if they do take criticism personally, it further reinforces the fact that they belong elsewhere and not in politics because in aspiring for political office, they seek to qualify for a job and those poised to "hire" them by casting their votes will scrutinize them to see if they are fit for the job. If they tend to forget that they are applying for a Job to serve the people and have to be qualified for the job, it is our duty to remind them. And some may argue that most of our people are ignorant about what qualifies a person to run our national affairs and instead are victims of exploitation by devious politicians who have encouraged them to make their decisions on who to support based on some of the variables you have mentioned, then if those of us who say that we know what the decisive criterion that is best for the people to adopt in choosing our leader do not prioritize educating and exposing our people to that fact, then we are not sincere at all. Where the norm has been to have people cast votes based on factionalism and the insincere have created, nurtured and exploited and continue to exploit that most heinous of crimes against the people in The Gambian as in the rest of Africa, some of us believe that it is time for this to come to an end. It is time that all those who profess to care about the welfare of Gambia and Gambians, and indeed the welfare of Africans as a whole to step up to the plate and be on the side of the people for once, and to be part of the process of making sure that we weed out those who fail us time and again by promoting divisiveness and self interest above national interest even at the most critical of times as they are in The Gambia at this moment. No time has ever been darker nor more critical in our history than the nightmarish and evil reign of the APRC regime. No generation of Gambians could have ever imagined that we would ever experience what the people are experiencing under the Jammeh regime. From corruption to cold blooded murder in broad daylight, to the resultant fear that has gripped our people, and most surprising of all, to the complacency that some of the populace have engaged in also to satisfy their own material interest. In this light, any effort that would have made it possible to dislodge these gang of thugs is more precious than life itself. Therefore, anyone whose actions and choices to gamble with this effort to see if they will win a coveted position and thereby compromises such an effort cannot have the interest of our people at heart and therefore is in-fact an enemy to our people because they have made choices that leave them to the possibility of continuing to live under a regime where murder, disappearances and cold fear is the daily norm. No one who cares, loves and puts our people first would ever do that and I would even go so far as to say that they are an enemy to our people. No one can be allowed to hold the people hostage while they pursue a personal quest for power and to even suggest that we entertain such a thing nullifies any other utterances that are made in support of liberating our people from tyranny. You also wrote: "Since its formation in the mid eighties, PDOIS behaved like a modern politcal apparatus. It recorded and archived all its ideas about governance, presented its opinion about all issues of national and regional significance, debated and defended its positions on these and operated consistently as an alternative government. Because it keeps records, and because it can date(!) national events it has opened up itself to probing and and can easily allow for transparency and more importantly, running an effective adminstration. One might not like Foroyaa, but one can remain confident that it provides a consistent and progressive source of political currency, even if one may not agree with it at all times. With sufficient resources, such a politcal apparatus can create and control a very strong organisation," You are quite right and it is quite evident that these are the building blocks of good governance and there is no doubt that even those who do not support them, the people behind such an organization not only have the ingredients, the conviction, the dedication and the capabilities to lead us into a bright future, they stand out head and shoulders among the political parties in our country. . Thus, in the interest of moving our people and our country forward, let all sincere Gambians emulate them even if they do not support them and concentrate our energies towards educating our people about political issues and their rights so that they make choices correctly instead of making excuses on behalf of those whose actions have demonstrated without a doubt that they are anathema to that effort. That is the only way we can make real progress towards shedding the yoke of tyranny as opposed to just paying it lip service while supporting inexcusable behaviour that ensures taking one step forward and two backwards. Jabou Joh In a message dated 9/10/2006 9:05:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [log in to unmask] writes: Sister Jabou Joh and Brother Joe, I had no intention to get to this point in this exchange. It feels premature, because there is likely to be a gruesome period of soul-searching amongst Gambians after the coming elections. But I also fear that, akin to previous periods of post-election trauma, all of that may end up into nothing more than having therapeutic effect. I hope I will be proven wrong, in all counts. It is true that scrutiny is necessary. In normal circumstances, I would have joined the fray to lay bare every political attempt at power in Gambia even if that alone is hardly sufficient. But my sensibilites are affected by the believe that the project towards "unifying" the Opposition even after September 22 would be crucial for the evolution of participatory democracy in our country. I tend to think that our proclivites towards the state of the opposition coalititon and the political alignments that the elections would produce, dictates present individual preoccupations. Ideally, we should demand the best and should not lower our standards. But the very essence of a coalition gestures precisely towards reaching compromises on those qualities we hold as best and of higher standard; endearing us to construct a half-way house between idealism and realism. But as I said, if one believes that the process is dead, the field opens up for internecine struggles of all sorts, exposing what is worst in eachother's closet of ideas. This should be unproblemmatic in developed polities where the contest for power rages within the realm of ideas. But where other variables such as unprincipled rivalry, vanity, ethnic identity, acquisitiveness, fear and even populism sway voter sentiments greatly, violent criticism is often taken personally. The effect is that the prospects for a future confluence of opposition parties becomes more remote than formerly. And not only that! We all know the UDP, don't we? It has been around for the last ten years, and so to seek certainty about its intentions in an election manifesto is like aspiring to define the APRC from dictated fiction gleaned from its Vision 2020 document. The UDP, like all of Gambia's post independance political parties (except PDOIS) rides on varying doses of populism, nevermind its professed assimilation of neoliberal, social democratic values. When sometime before the 2001 elections, Hamjatta Kanteh marketted Mr. Ousainou Darboe on Gambia-L as a most patriotic Gambian who sacrificed everything to wage a struggle against the quasi-military tyranny, some of us scoffed at that sort of politcal commerce. Mr. Darboe, of course, deserves much respect, but the party he leads, I thought even then, came to be the natural abode of disgruntled politicians and businessmen made homeless by APRC purges of the PPP and NCP. It posesses neither the ideological conviction nor the organizational tradition to carry the struggle for power beyond mere protest against corruption and the excesses of an egoistic political elite feeding on the spoils of power. It cannot control and alter the role of institutions even if it assumes state power. This conclusion brings me to the reason I think the coalition is of major importance. Since its formation in the mid eighties, PDOIS behaved like a modern politcal apparatus. It recorded and archived all its ideas about governance, presented its opinion about all issues of national and regional significance, debated and defended its positions on these and operated consistently as an alternative government. Because it keeps records, and because it can date(!) national events it has opened up itself to probing and and can easily allow for transparency and more importantly, running an effective adminstration. One might not like Foroyaa, but one can remain confident that it provides a consistent and progressive source of political currency, even if one may not agree with it at all times. With sufficient resources, such a politcal apparatus can create and control a very strong organisation, even if such an organisation may not necessarily be democratric in character. (I cannot vouch for how decisions were reached inside PDOIS, thus my scepticism). It is this character of PDOIS as a modern, workable institution, that appeals to educated, young Gambians, perhaps because it rekindles a familiarity with structures. Informed Gambians who oppose it are, therefore, easily identifiable. As important as they are, I would refrain from mentioning the characters of its leaders, as these, unlike the nature of the organisation they represent, are transient. There has never been a political party with such administrative, organisational and political potential in our country, and these are the qualities with which it would have infused the character of a coalition of opposition parties. NADD could have evolved into a society-oriented politcal movement, i.e a political instrument that reorganises society as a way of changing the state; as opposed to a state-based politcal group - which have invariably failed everywhere in Africa. NADD could have forever altered the nature of politics in Gambia! NADD's failure to mature into what we had hoped for is of historic significance in a state as small as ours, and the responsibility for this failure, spreads more widely than many seem to think. To resuscitate NADD at time a time when the struggle for power is at its peak is simply more difficult than doing so after the elections. I think that effort should be pursued with even more vigour, and I do not think continued internecine squabble will help it. Cheers, sidibeh いいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいい To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to: [log in to unmask] いいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいい