Africa

So the Tories have announced their new international development policy. Apparently it's going to be "results-based" and fit for a "post-bureaucratic age" (this latter being, mind you, the kind of phrase coined by bureaucrats). Iain Dale likes the sound of it and so does Tory Bear. I'm sure there are plenty of good ideas lurking in the new paper, but I'm also pretty sure that there's not much sign of the Tories moving towards a truly radical approach to international development: open borders. Actually, it's not quite open borders, more a question of creating a worldwide guest-worker programme. Harvard's Lant Pritchett is perhaps the leading proponent of this sort of idea.

Dons don’t usually appear to much advantage in fiction. For those who follow African affairs, these are not happy times. Once regarded as passé, the military coup is enjoying something of a come- back. Men formerly hailed as Renaissance leaders seem bent on being crowned presidents-for-life. From Sudan to Kenya, Somalia to Zimbabwe, carefully negotiated peace deals and coalition governments have either already foundered or quiver on the brink of collapse. So this book possesses a terrible poignancy. The years it covers — a time when black nationalists in the territories that went on to become today’s Zimbabwe, Malawi and Zambia campaigned to shrug off white rule — are still comparatively recent history.

Uganda's ethics and integrity minister recognises that these are perilous times. Women wearing mini-skirts, he says, are a danger to public safety, responsible for all manner of traffic accidents. What's wrong with a miniskirt? You can cause an accident because some of our people are weak mentally." He continued arguing that, "if you find a naked person you begin to concentrate on the make-up of that person and yet you are driving." According to Foreign Policy: The BBC notes that [Mr] Buturo is seeking to rid Uganda of its many vices, and inappropriate dress is just one of the many indecent items that appear on the minister's list. Among others are theft and embezzlement of public funds, sub-standard service delivery, greed, infidelity, prostitution, and homosexuality.

The Boston Globe:"Candidates Unite Against Darfur Genocide"Isn't it a bit late for that? "Today, we wish to make clear to the Sudanese government that on this moral issue of tremendous importance, there is no divide between us," the three candidates say. "We stand united and demand that the genocide and violence in Darfur be brought to an end and that the CPA be fully implemented. Even as we campaign for the presidency, we will use our standing as Senators to press for the steps needed to ensure that the United States honors, in practice and in deed, its commitment to the cause of peace and protection of Darfur's innocent citizenry. We will continue to keep a close watch on events in Sudan and speak out for its marginalized peoples.

Annoyed though I am by Hillary's claim to have solved the Irish Question, it's nothing compared to her - how to put it? - revisionist claims about the Rwandan genocide. These are revolting. Hilzoy lays it all out here in a post* that's as enraging as it is sickening. The conclusion: I think it's a lot more likely that she either didn't advocate action on Rwanda at all, or did so only in passing. If so, this would have to be the definitive example of her attempt to claim responsibility for everything good that happened during her husband's presidency, while disavowing all responsibility for his mistakes. This was, in my opinion, the most shameful moment of the Clinton administration.