The video says it all ... :o)

This second video comes through openalex and explains the Barefoot College's solar electrification programs across Africa. Very cool.

For the last few days there has been a heated debate about the news that the Libyan government will execute a number of Nigerian nationals who were planning on emigrating to Europe illegally. Libya has been, let's say, a bit too enthusiastic about helping Italy stop undocumented Black Africans from reaching European territory. The externalization of migration control is happening all throughout the border of the EU, but cooperation with some countries such as Libya and Morocco is, to put it mildly, highly problematic. You may read some reports by AI, a light academic article by Marko Kananen or take a look at Gabrielle del Grande's blog if you are interested in learning more about it. (BTW, del Grande also has published an interesting yet very sensationalist book on border control in Europe, Mamadou is going to die: the Carnage of immigrants in the Mediterranean sea.)

It is in this context that the news about the execution of more than 200 Nigerians happens, which makes it the more worrying because the idea is not completely far-fetched. But, is it true? We don't really know. Although the international media has been quick in spreading the word, the fact is that all articles point to the same source: Nigerian newspaper Vanguard.

Not that there is anything new under the sun, really: there is plenty of evidence to prove that the Libyan government has been torturing, raping, practicing illegal detentions, mistreating detainees in prisons, and abandoning undocumented Black Africans who were assumed to be undocumented wanna-be migrants in the desert. This has happened also to international students and status refugees who lived in Libya, just because they were Black. But if this was really happening, if the Libyan government is really planning on "officially" executing 220 Nigerians for no other crime that crossing its borders without a valid permit, then ... well. I wonder how the EU is going to justify the heavy subsidies that it is sending to Libya in exchange for their cooperation in the control of undocumented migration and a generous share of their natural resources.

Damn it. I hope del Grande is right and this article is an hoax. I think we're loosing perspective when it comes to border control.

--> 14/08/09 UPDATE: from This Day journal (Nigeria):

No Nigerian was killed in Libya

The Presidency has denied reports that about 200 Nigerians were secretly executed last weekend by the Libyan authorities. It described the report, which alleged that about 230 black Africans, mostly Nigerians, were to be secretly executed by the Libyan authorities last weekend as baseless and unfounded. Presidential Spokesman, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, who fielded questions from State House correspondents on the issue yesterday, faulted the story, saying, "I can assure you there was no such thing. I have a copy of a very detailed 32-page report compiled by the Nigerian ambassador in Libya dated July 13 this year on Nigerians currently having issues with the Libyan authorities. "From the report, there are 14 Nigerians on death row for such offences as murder, drugs, armed robbery and ‘419’." He said the list contains the names, location of prisons where the Nigerians were being held, dates of sentence and their states of origin in Nigeria.. He also disclosed that a total of 57 Nigerians were currently serving life sentence for offences in connection with alcohol, fake currency, drugs, robbery and fighting, while 587 others were awaiting trial for various alleged offences. Adeniyi said government was making diplomatic efforts towards securing reprieve for those on death row and also to ensure that at least those with immigration issues were released so they could be repatriated home, while acknowledging that the negotiations were not easy.

I've been missing Senegal since I came back. Pretty much every day my phone rings for a few seconds, and it's someone I met there saying "bonjour" in that peculiar way. If they ring twice, that means that I should give them a call. Sometimes I also get an sms telling me that the hibernage is going well at home or that there are so many mangoes even cows let them rot on the ground. Yesterday I called Mame Fatou, my "mum" in Guédiawaye (in fact an Ibadu or orthodox Muslim woman my age) with whom I've had the most interesting conversations about religion and politics I've ever had. Every time I talk to her I wish they had invented something even faster than planes that would allow me to go there to taste her Thie Boudienne again.

And really, it's about time I go back, because I've ran out of Casamance cashews!! One more addiction to add to my list, following olive oil. Little did I know when I got off the boat in Ziguinchor that I was about to learn where cashews came from and how hard it is to make them properly. Because, in case you don't know (as I didn't) cashews come from a tree that has a fruit that looks a bit like a red or yellow chubby pepper with a green ... something hanging at the end. Like this:

People (often children) go around picking the cashew fruit around with buckets. There are not many Toubabs doing it, but every now and then you run into one that shines like the the ass of a blue-butt-money. This one was seen near Bignona.

Once you've picked up the cashew fruits and sorted out the pepper-like fruit from the ... herr ... something-like appendix where the nut is, you proceed to make juice with the fruit, squeezing it either by hand or with the help of a big stick. But careful with the bees!! They're addicted to cashew juice (specially when it starts to ferment!)

And then comes the hardest part: drying and toasting the nuts. Impatient young people will probably not wait long enough for them to dry in the sun. The problem is that then nuts become flammable, and you know what will happen when you put them on the fire? This:

And that is bad, because cashews are not fire-proof and they get black and with an intense burnt flavour (guess what: you've burnt them!). But if you let them dry long enough and then put them on the fire, the shell will get crispy and separate from the nut easily.

That's better!! The end result, in this case a mix of burnt and not burn cashews, is super tasty. But I'll have to wait until next year to have more of those. Sniff.

Sometimes I feel more Toubab than others. And since French is not my first language, sometimes I have to read things slowly, or even twice, to understand them well. But there are these cases when I read them four, five times, and I still think I must have made a mistake. This seems to happen more often when I read news about M. Abdulaye Wade, 83, current president of Senegal.

See the picture?

From the Atepa Group's website

It is a projected (and severely over sized) vision of the Monument to the Renaissance of Africa, conceived by Wade Senior. It symbolizes "an Africa that frees itself from all sorts of domination to enter a new world" (source). It is also meant to compete with the (smaller, bien sûre) Statue of the Liberty on the other side of the Atlantic. When I arrived in Dakar I lived about a kilometer from it, and the thing was still far from having a recognizable shape. Little by little we could see two sets of legs, then a torso, and then I left. If all goes well (the construction, my plans) I will see it shortly after it is finished: the project is scheduled to finalized in December. Apart from the monument, the area around the monument will be geared towards tourism, including a lookout to the city of Dakar, several restaurants, stores, and conference space.

Nothing out of the ordinary, although this is one of many faraonic monuments in a city that, in my humble opinion, could use those funds to build badly needed infrastructure (garbage collection, sewage) and a better public transit system for all those who spend four hours a day traveling between the banlieu and the Plateau. But it's ok, said Mr. President, because we haven't paid for the construction of the monument: we have exchanged it for the lot where it will stand, and we will be able to enjoy its (and his) glory for the next 1,200 years.

None of this convinced those opposing the construction of the monument -- and let me tell you: they're a good bunch. A number of those who are listened argue that the monument is an offense to the arts, others that it is insulting the modesty of a nation of believers and that it is an aggression to the beautiful landscape of the Mamelles area (for a couple of reactions see here and here). I agree with number one and three, and declare myself incapable of intervention regarding number two.

Anyways: it's a matter of life that we don't always agree with politicians. But what about someone who is an elected official (a President of the government is not any kind of elected position), who has a salary for the job that he does, which is to keep a country running properly, and then decides to add "extras" to his salary? What about M. Wade Senior saying that, since it was his idea to build the monument, it is therefore his intellectual property? And that his son (Wade junior, who failed in the last Dakar elections and has ambitions to be the next president of Senegal) will be in charge of keeping the business running so that he, Wade senior, can reap a generous 35% of the benefits?

Excuse my Toubabness, but I don't get it. And I'm not the only one.

>> EDIT: I just found out about a new and creative version of the monument that has been circulating around the internet, showing the Wades in their heroism. The Minister of Communication doesn't like it very much ... Maybe he also has intellectual property rights over the statue?

The U.S. military has performed successful aid missions in war zones. But that doesn't mean it will work everywhere.

U.S. foreign aid has never been perfect, but the seeping of military and antiterrorism initiatives into development work threatens to take humanitarian efforts to a new low.

In an attempt to win the hearts and minds of local populations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military reasoned that it must demonstrate the concrete benefits of collaborating with Americans in the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban. They used soldiers and other military personnel to build schools and bridges in these countries -- with mixed success. This engendered a tendency to apply the approach anywhere in the world where there was a whiff of al Qaeda activity. To this end, the percentage of U.S. foreign aid channeled through the military increased from 6 to 20 percent worldwide between 2002 and 2007.

But though using the military as a development agency can make sense in a war zone, mixing their two very different missions is enormously problematic in most other contexts.

In the West African country of Mali, where I have been researching agricultural development issues for more than 20 years, there has been low-grade al Qaeda activity occurring in the northern frontier over the past few years. The marginal desert region between Mali and its neighbors is appealing real estate for would-be terrorists because it is difficult to control and monitor. It provides space for camps and opportunities for terrorist cells to tax cross-border trade and occasionally kidnap foreign nationals for ransom. The U.S. government provides assistance to Mali's military to manage and contain the few, mostly foreign, al Qaeda bands in this small area of the country.

But now the U.S. military is getting involved in development work across Mali and in several other countries in the Sahel region of West Africa -- as it did in Iraq and Afghanistan -- despite the de minimis al Qaeda threat. Now, military personnel repair schools, wells, health centers, roads, and bridges. Army doctors provide basic treatment and vaccinations. In fiscal year 2008, the Defense Department gave the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) mission in Mali $9.5 million to run a counterterrorism program, with close coordination between the two. The program provides curriculum advice to Koranic schools and job training for young men (who are seen as highly susceptible to Islamist rhetoric). USAID has also built 14 community radio stations that broadcast programming on peace and tolerance.

But this reframing of aid to Mali within the fight against terrorism could prove counterproductive. The Pentagon has taken its conceptualization of the fight against al Qaeda in war zones and applied it broadly in a peaceful country. In the past, U.S. involvement in West African countries like Mali has focused intently on humanitarian assistance, not a geopolitical agenda.

And there is little reason to think military-supplied aid assistance will work better. Malians may resent it reflexively: The United States has a checkered history and a terrible reputation for its involvement in other African states, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (then Zaire) during the Cold War. It can also mean making development take a back seat to other goals -- recipients sense that their welfare is not the real priority and fear political interference. Development aid for its own sake is the best way to maintain strong allies in the region and foster healthy, pluralistic societies.

The U.S. government has long provided such valuable help. Organizations such as the Peace Corps and USAID have worked in Mali for more than 40 years, since it gained independence from France. Volunteers live in villages, speak local languages, and have facilitated community development work for decades, cultivating friendships and lasting positive change. The gains are significant in healthcare, agriculture, forestry, sanitation, small-enterprise development, and education.

Malians have a mostly positive attitude toward the United States as a result -- and President Barack Obama is very popular as well. In contrast, most Malians with whom I have spoken in recent months are deeply suspicious of al Qaeda, which they consider an outside organization dominated by foreigners with little interest in the Malian people.

There have of course been many problems with U.S. foreign assistance (including the provision of aid to dictators), but many of these failures occurred because lasting development was not the first priority. But skilled aid workers have the soft skills, historical and cultural knowledge, and technical expertise needed for effective development. The U.S. military, on the other hand, is good at fighting and building temporary infrastructure -- not human development.

As such, recent attempts by the U.S. military to become involved in development in Mali and its neighbors make little sense. The United States is already viewed positively by the local population. Other agencies are better positioned to facilitate and have a track record of positive change. When the military becomes involved in development work, the local population comes to see these efforts as part of a larger military campaign. And that's a dangerous precedent to set.

>> Article published in Foreign Policy 31/07/2009, published and translated here with permission from the author: <<