A GEOGRAPHICAL APPROACH TO THE ECONOMY: CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS

A GEOGRAPHICAL APPROACH TO THE ECONOMY: CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS JATTA KEBBA 08/25/13 SUMMARY: This paper is an analysis of the 2005 famine in Niger as well as the financial powerhouse in Wall Street, New York, from an economic geographic perspective as compared to the traditional orthodox economic analysis. It seeks to understand Niger and Wall Street’s unique position in the global (and national) pattern of uneven development, their social structures, and the characteristics and capabilities of their governing institutions. KEY POINTS: 1. Differences between the economist’s and economic geographer’s perspectives on the economy 2. Patterns of uneven development (national, regional, and global) as a necessity of global capitalism 3. Famine as a problem of distribution rather than production 4. Social constructions and representations of poverty and underdevelopment MOST IMPORTANT TERMS AND DEFINITIONS: • Place-refers to the specificity and uniqueness of a particular territory as a result of the interaction of physical features and social processes. • Space-refers to physical distance and area with defined boundaries from other entities. • Scale-refers to the size of the unit in consideration. For example, Niger could be considered at the national, regional or global scale. • Representation-refers to social constructions that describe and create representations of place, space and scale. LINKS: • Masochi to Manhattan versus low wage and high wage earners in the U.S. • Inequality as a product of capitalism • Profiteering versus human worth QUESTIONS: 1. How significant was the 2005 famine to the 2010 military ouster of Niger’s elected President? 2. Niger’s uranium was mentioned in the run up to the invasion of Iraq in 2002. What’s uranium’s contribution to Niger’s economy? 3. Why is so much Wall Street bashing? Is it seen as symbolic of the tyranny of capitalism?

JULY 22: NO REVOLUTION IN THE GAMBIA (Revised). Kayjatta Kansas City INTRODUCTION   Today July 22, 2013 marked 19 years of military rule in the Gambia. In the summer of 1994, disgruntled junior officers of the Gambia National Army (GNA) toppled the democratically elected PPP government of Alhagie Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara that ruled the Gambia for thirty years, since independence from Britain in 1965. Jammeh’s role in that coup still remains unclear despite his repeated claim that he led it. Many Gambians believe that he was selected to leadership only because of his seniority. President Jammeh has since retired from the army after promoting himself to colonel and has transformed his military council (AFPRC) into the ruling APRC political party that has won four consecutive presidential elections widely condemned by independent observers as not free and fair. Despite his civilian façade, President Jammeh continues to rule as a military dictator, assuming enormous national security powers, and in the process destroying all the democratic institutions of the country. The legislature, the judiciary, opposition parties, labor unions, student organizations, the media, business associations, NGOs, religious groups, etc have all been reduced to the ground through various tactics of intimidation – including detentions, torture, and executions of perceived enemies. At the time of the July 22 military coup, the Gambia was enjoying relative peace and stability in a very unstable West African sub-region. The fall of Jawara’s PPP (peoples’ Progressive Party) government was considered “…sad times“for African democracy. At the time of the coup, the Gambia was considered to have the “longest functioning democracy in Africa”. The coup of July 1994 in the Gambia was part of a larger trend in Africa since January 1963 when soldiers brought down the elected government of Silvanus Olympio in Togo. This military intervention in Togo was quickly followed by Congo (DRC) and Benin in August and October respectively, when civilian governments in both countries were toppled. Many other African countries experienced military interventions, some repeatedly since then. Nigerian (January 1966, July 1966, 1975, 1976, 1983, 1985, 1990 and 1993). Ghana (1975, 1978, and 1979).  Gabon (1964), Angola (1977), Kenya (1982), Mali (1968, 1991, and 2012), Sierra Leone (1968, 1992, 1996, and 1997) Liberia (1980, 1989), Senegal (1962), Gambia (1981, 1994), Uganda (1971, 1986). The military have either toppled or attempted to topple governments in other countries including Ethiopia, Somalia, Egypt, Algeria, Burkina Faso, Guinea Bissau and Guinea Conakry. Jammeh came to power against this backdrop. The civil wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone were  still raging; and political sentiments about the military regimes of Valentine Strasser (Sierra Leone), General Sani Abacha (Nigeria), Ft. Lt. JJ Rawlings Ghana), and Col. Qaddaffi (Libya) were still fever high. However, this was also a time when military coups have been tapering off in African and around the world for some time. Many military regimes have or are beginning to return to democracy; hence the so-called "third wave democratization' in Africa. Therefore, the coup of 1994 in the Gambia could be considered a setback to the 'third wave democratization' in Africa. JULY 1994 REVOLUTION, OR IS IT? The aftermath of the military takeover of 1994 is still very controversial.  Jammeh’s ardent supporters often refer to it as “The Revolution”, while many other Gambians consider it to have fallen far short of its revolutionary promise. There is a huge gulf between ‘pretention and reality’. The AFPRC/APRC government, despite its rhetoric and lofty development ambition, barely qualify as a reformist regime much more a revolutionary one. It has to be admitted however, that Jammeh; considering his socio-economic background, could have been the ideal voice and hope for the struggling masses of Gambians. Part of the explanation for the initial support for the coup is that many Gambians were able to identify with him after decades of PPP squander and arrogance. But since coming to power, despite its rhetoric, the AFPRC/APRC has no radical economic or cultural vision. ‘July 22’, for nineteen years now, has not gotten rid of old ideas and structures in favor of new economic and social relationships. Vision 2020, the government's blueprint for socio-economic change has failed. Both economic and political power remains concentrated in the hands of a few army officers and their civilian cronies in the private sector. The masses of Gambians remain even poorer than they were under the civilian government that was toppled on July 22, 1994. There is no political education or actual re-orientation of the masses, partly because the coup makers on July 22 have no political education themselves. There is also no ideological underpinning to differentiate AFPRC/APRC from the civilian government of Jawara’s PPP. Instead of mass political education and re-orientation, decentralizing power into the hands of the people, and increased economic efficiency; widespread abuse of power and corruption continues to be the order of the day. Therefore, Jammeh is not even a “reluctant revolutionary” as in the case of Saikou Toure (Guinea Conakry) - his latest idol. And certainly there were no “Arusha Declaration” as in the case of Julius Nyerere of Tanzania. Through his poor governance and human rights violations, President Jammeh has alienated Gambia’s development partners around the world. Jammeh himself has not been officially welcomed in Europe or the United States-Gambia's traditional allies- for almost all of his entire two decades in office. The European Union further suspended much needed development funds to the Gambia following the recent standoff over the Jammeh-regime’s human rights obligations under the ‘Cotonou Agreement’. Fear and uncertainty continues to grip the nation. Creativity and self-expression are stifled. As a result, economic development (which goes hand-in-hand with good governance) remains an illusion. Also Jammeh’s “Back to the Land” call (a central tenet of ‘The Revolution’) which takes away productive land from the ordinary people and give them to the rich few is not helping his alleged revolutionary standing. The “Back to the Land” call by the APRC is no semblance to the “Green Revolution” of the Indian Punjab. CONCLUSION: A revolution, in order to succeed, must radically transform the economic, social, cultural, and political existence of a given people. The military regime of Yahya Jammeh, for nearly two decades from July 22, 1994 to July 22, 2013 has not succeeded, as it promised, in seriously transforming the Gambian economic and social structures in any profound way. Poverty and inequality remains high and continues to increase. Jammeh’s rule continues to be remembered for its human rights abuses more than anything else. And the socio-economic condition of Gambians is worse than ever. Therefore, the call for another struggle for independence still remains valid in the Gambia. This is well captured in the words of Alexander Hamilton (a United States founding father): "Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit...".

Alioune Mbaye NDER - Aladji

KAYJATTA
An evening with Mbai Nderr. I particularly like the soft melody of this piece, led by the guitars and the keyboard. And you can hear the supporting percussions (a crucial element of Senegambian music) in those sputtering melancholic notes in the background. Great instrumentation and very relaxing !