|
|
Angola:
from politics of disorder to politics of democratization?
Steve Kibble
On
Wednesday, Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos
declared that his country would go to the polls before the
end of 2008. Elections, not held since 1992, have been
constantly delayed in the country, leading human rights
activists to accuse the government of clinging to power.
Steve Kibble analyses the complex nature of the
Angolan state, concluding that: “Despite rhetoric on
increased transparency, accountability and democratization
little has yet been accomplished to overcome the gap between
ruler and ruled.”
Angola became independent from the Portuguese in 1975 after
a costly and long running liberation war with three
antagonistic independence movements based on different
ethno-linguistic, ideological constituencies. In its almost
fourth year of peace there is no immediate reason why war
should resume. This follows 27 years of nearly continuous
civil war between Uniao Nacional para a Independencia total
de Angola (UNITA) rebels under their dictatorial leader
Jonas Savimbi, and the governing Movimento Popular de Libertacao
de Angola (MPLA). The former were US and apartheid
South Africa-backed, with a rhetoric of representing the
poor ‘real’ rural Africans of the interior. The governing
party was based on the coastal elite which has large urban
and mestizo elements, with a commitment to nationalism,
socialism, and anti-imperialism in a conflict overlaid by
the Cold War.
In 1991 the Stalinist state with an inefficient command
economy changed to a supposed multiparty democratic state
and market economy. Few freedoms were realized although free
and fair elections were won by the government in 1992 – the
‘excuse’ for UNITA to renew the war. The state remained
heavily centralized with the president able to control
extra-budgetary revenues for his own accumulation and clientilist
purposes. It has massive oil production, revenues and
potential. Much of the infrastructure, agriculture and
rudimentary health services were destroyed by war with
millions of landmines being laid - with knock-on effects on
agriculture, transport as well as people’s lives.
War also meant excess mortality of one million deaths -
roughly a tenth of Angola’s population, displacement and
urbanization with about half of all Angolans, perhaps seven
million people, living in cities and towns. The agrarian
system collapsed as did the health and education services –
only 37 percent of primary-aged children were enrolled in
school whilst most of the health budget goes to
hospital-based curative services, including elite spending
in South Africa and Portugal.
Peace broke out in April 2002 when Savimbi was killed,
leaving the MPLA-controlled government undisputed victor,
but espousing reconciliation (Although reconciliation here
largely means (six) blanket amnesties, no truth commissions
and inviting selected opposition elements into the elite) -
for which civil society can claim some credit. The country
in theory faces a triple transition from war to peace, from
devastation to reconstruction, and from a state/elite
patronage system to a transparent market economy. The first
two are better advanced including a greater commitment to
infrastructural (re)construction. Many in civil society
express concerns over delays in and government commitment to
reform. Inflation has been brought down although no major
structural reform has occurred. In particular there is
unlikely to be a challenge to
the key nature of the bazaar economy (Cadongo) in trade and
services controlled upstream by commercial tycoons and army
officers able to accumulate resources by using special
powers, granted them by senior politicians, to import goods
(Angola is ranked 133 out of 145 countries on Transparency
International’s corruption index. Between 1997 and 2001,
$8.45 billion of public money was unaccounted for
(an average of 23% of GDP)- IMF).
Transition or Steady State?
There is an assumption that Angola is in transition and that
its current dysfunctionality will change. Conversely we can
see the ‘politics of disorder’ as a functional ‘steady
state’ for the Angolan elite. It holds a number of cards,
despite dependence on conditionalities such as high oil
prices and ability to attract concessional oil-backed loans
such as from Standard Bank and $2billion from the Chinese
Eximbank in 2005 (As part of the loan agreement, the Chinese
are repairing infrastructure but in an opaque
non-competitive deal with only 30% of the work going to
local (elite-linked) firms.).
Africa's second largest producer is one of its fastest
growing economies with some of its poorest people (Revista
Energia’, a publication that monitors the country's energy
sector, puts yearly government oil revenues at between US $4
billion and $5 billion). In
2005 oil production was 1.3 million barrels a day set to
increase to two million by 2008. Much of this estimated
$6.88 billion revenue goes to a small number of wealthy
Angolans with little reaching citizens (Nearly all of
Angola's production is offshore and for every million
invested in the industry, only $100,000 is spent
onshore.). The government budgeted for 16% growth although
the IMF paper projected annual growth at 18% a year over
2005-2007 [1].
The country had a UNDP Human Development Index of 0.445 –
making it 160 of 177. There was neither formal agreement
with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 2005 or the
much-heralded donors’ conference. Donors appeared reluctant
to commit to a poor country with a rich elite in relation to
a conference or humanitarian appeals.
Angola is also the 4th or 5th largest diamond producer -
like oil, an enclave sector with little regulation or
accountability, where forced labor, ill-treatment and
disappearances were common. Production was expected to raise
around $900 million despite continued smuggling (Despite
expulsions of 127,000 foreign nationals involved in the
illegal diamond trade between April 2004 and February 2005
– accompanied by allegations of brutality).
Like many oil-producing countries. Angola sees the paradox
between exploitation of oil, gas and minerals and high rates
of poverty indicators of child malnutrition, low health care
spending, low school enrolment rates and poor adult literacy
(and war). Over one
million Angolan people remained dependent on food aid, and
one child died every three minutes of preventable causes –
480 per day.
The effect of oil wealth (‘Dutch disease’) is to cause
economic contraction and inflation through high local
prices, expensive exchange rates and depressed levels of
manufacturing in other sectors plus lack of national
accountability, especially with increased world demand,
tightening supply and in 2005 continued high prices. The
underlying problem is the ‘resource curse’ of oil-based
economic enclaves with greater external than internal
linkages, meaning a lack of reciprocity between domestic
rulers and ruled in all spheres – ‘a state without citizens’
or certainly state-citizen reciprocity
[2].
The industry employs only 10,000, although accounting for
90% of exports and 80% of tax revenues. Necessary economic
diversification is complicated because it is uncertain the
elite wants diversification given its control over import
and export and
reluctance to allow an unfettered free market.
There have
been changes. Transparency has improved in revenue if
not expenditure through publication of an oil diagnostic
undertaken by outside consultants KPMG and moves towards
declaration of signature bonus payments. Although
allegations of corruption persist, with high-ranking
government officials implicated in private business
deals related to their public office, there were successful
prosecutions of senior officials in 2003-2004. In July 2004
Angola signed up to the African Union’s Peer Review
Mechanism – although it is far from meeting its conditions.
Angola then faces the task of moving from a state of non-war
to a ‘Civil / Social Peace’. But despite GDP growth, a
current account surplus, and the lowest inflation rate ever
[3], transition would have to be
from a fragmented national economy with a history of
financial embezzlement and misappropriation of funds, a lack
of international confidence and donor coordination, poor
administrative capacity, a large child population at risk
from disease, and largely weak opposition and civil society.
If a genuine transition it would mean ending corruption,
tackling poverty, allowing the development of a genuinely
independent private sector, creating an open and
transparent tendering process, transforming the political
system into a pluralist democracy. Civil society also calls
for action on disarming the armed civilian Angolans (an
estimated one third of the population but not a government
priority), clearing (the unknown numbers of) landmines, and
addressing the exclusion of the poor and marginalized,
especially women. A widely owned electoral process would
legitimize the institutions of government, debatedly without
it since 1996, and lead to a constitution guaranteeing
citizens' rights.
But there are a number of reasons why the government can
ignore these problems whilst maintaining its own stability
and security. Renewal of war is highly unlikely whereas
continued high oil prices and fields for development and
oil-backed loans look set to continue. The latter are not as
cheap as multilateral funding, but are more
government controllable. Continued Middle East instability
combined with US (disputed) hegemony over the Gulf of
Guinea/ the ‘American Lake’ means that Washington is looking
to increased African oil, expecting it to provide 25% of its
supplies. The increasing market share for Angolan oil going
to the USA and other states means national and international
security considerations precede transparency or human rights
questions.
Angola is a strong security state under few internal or
regional threats. Cooption, division and occasional
repression work well to negate any possible internal
threats. The Angolan elite remain largely immune to what
international pressure there is for good governance -
directed more towards questions of transparency, and
a secure climate for foreign investment (FDI) rather than
democracy and poverty alleviation. The West wants to engage
with a booming economy, keen to compete with China’s lion’s
share of contracts for infrastructural (re)construction.
The continuing geo-petroleo-strategic interest of the USA in
the Gulf of Guinea and Angola in particular as alternative
sources of supply to the Middle East was shown in continued
good relations. The country gained a growing share of the US
market (although oil exports to China overtook those to the
USA) and the latter continues as Angola’s chief trading
partner, political patron and major aid donor and gives it
on rather inconsistent grounds preferential African Growth
and Opportunity Act (AGOA) treatment. Relations improved
with Bern after the resolution of ‘Falconegate
[4]’ whereby the Swiss released
$17m for humanitarian purposes of frozen Angolan funds
[5].
This lack of international pressure is against the
background of declining world oil production now over the
‘Bell curve’. Regionally, excluding Zimbabwe and (parts of)
the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the region has
been stabilised - in part by previous Angolan interventions
to destroy UNITA bases. Angola is able to use the rhetoric
of sovereignty and anti-imperialism which resonates well in
the southern African region, despite the more partial AU
view of sovereignty as opposed to the absolutist OAU
version.
Luanda alleges negotiations are taking place on ending the
Cabindan separatist conflict - distinct from though
entangled with the civil war. Cabinda enclave from where oil
wealth derives has separatist factions fighting for
independence. Cabindan human rights organization Mpalabanda
Cabinda Civic Association (MACC) says although it received a
document from the government in February 2006 on ‘greater
autonomy’ for the enclave, it has heard little since of any
negotiations. If Cabinda can be stabilized, Angola’s rulers
can open up human rights a little especially in the coastal
region/
Luanda without endangering control.
Additionally, rather than seeing forthcoming elections
whenever they are as an opportunity, the population being
only too aware of what happened in 1992, seems as much
fearful or apathetic.
The governing MPLA can pay off and play off other parties
[6]. Whilst there are factions,
the president runs a parallel state and seems in control as
with his reversal of not standing as its
presidential candidate. Through government reshuffles he
negates existing and potential opponents such as the chief
of external intelligence agency
General Fernando Miala (who paid the price for becoming too
popular).
UNITA formally reconciled its three factions after 2002, but
leader Isaias Samakuva is under threat for operating a
patronage system and expelling possible leadership
challengers. Other parties seem more concerned with ‘getting
their snouts in the trough’ rather than representing
distinct interests and policies.
Political disorder and its uses
Angola is an example of the use of ‘disorder as a
political instrument’ where non-transparency,
non-accountable authority, and a weak legal framework
provide dynamics for elite accumulation. Historically there
has been a ‘Bermuda triangle’ of resource flows between
Presidency, Sonangol and the national bank, bypassing
formal organs such as the Ministry of Finance (although the
latter is gaining greater control). As well as vast
corruption in the past detailed by many reports including
from the IMF, Global Witness and Human Rights Watch etc,
practices continue as shown in the reports from Brazil
alleging illegal financial dealings linking the Angola
Minister of Finance, and the Governor of the Central Bank
[7].
Sogge notes that the domestic Angolan political economy
“cannot be separated from the external constituencies,
chiefly the global oil and banking industries, and strongly
favourable diplomatic and military currents driven by
Western (especially US) strategic
interests.” [8] In this sense Angola’s problems of
domestic governance “are at the same time problems of global
governance” in which the constrained forms of global
citizenship “practised by institutions offshore set limits
to citizenship for ordinary Angolans onshore”.
Elections – paths to democracy or
ensuring the right result?
Elections have been promised and not held since the end of
the war in 2002. The parliamentary and presidential
elections announced unconvincingly in 2005 for September
2006 and 2007 respectively are now postponed until there are
infrastructural improvements – for which the government
would gain electoral advantage and increased control over
the process.
Civil society - small, autonomous
but with some resistance
A third of
Angola’s population live in atomised musseques (shantytowns),
with little spontaneous collective action to solve common
problems. Despite little alternative leadership and
vision, there have recently been protests over forced
removals in some
neighbourhoods in Luanda, leading to the arrest of
SOS-Habitat coordinator Luis Araujo and others. Change due
to citizen pressure has been limited by the absence of
public systems and institutions – part of the general
disorder that has served elites well for many years. There
has been civil society questioning the continuation of José
Eduardo dos Santos as President, transparency and corruption
in government, the land law and the new constitution, the
DDR process, police and military impunity, freedom of
expression and political action, and Cabinda.
International activism has raised issues and set agendas in
corporate behavior such as the ‘Publish What You Pay’
campaign on transparency of payments by oil companies.
There has been talk of freeing up government control of the
media and willingness to address the low rate of HIV/AIDS
and associated vulnerabilities despite difficulties in
access to rural areas. Despite low population density land
is scarce, with an estimated four million people relying on
subsistence agriculture for survival as the only source of
family income. Land tenure and use are flashpoints
for disputes with large-scale population return to rural
areas. In the ideological shifts of the early 1990s, a huge
privatisation program saw an elite land grab at the expense
of small peasants. There is
potential for conflict between customary law and state land
law with the former discriminating against women.
Although
the 2005 land reform law allowed communities to access
and legally register their land - leading to hopes of
greater security for and improvement in Angola's
agricultural production - it is doubted it will eliminate
conflict.
Women – the burdens of war become
those of peace
Women suffered enormously during the war both through the
direct effects of violent conflict and the indirect effect
of poverty on families and communities. 80% of IDPs were
women and children, suffering high levels of mortality,
malnutrition, illiteracy, poverty and HIV/AIDS and lack of
access to health, information, education and
water – and decision-making. Current government crack downs
on informal commercial activity increase poverty levels
amongst poor urban women with a knock on effect on domestic
violence against women.
Enter the IMF – or not?
Angola has applied for an IMF programme to restructure its
debt [9], but not for new loans
given the ‘tiny amounts’ compared to Chinese and other
loans. A syndicate of European banks led by French bank Calyon
are organizing a $2.25 billion [10] oil-backed loan to Sonangol
to refinance existing debt and $800 million in new money
for
undisclosed use, with the Chinese buying the oil. Finance
Minister Jose Pedro de Morais said endless failed talks
with the IMF were due to its not having an accumulated
knowledge of Angolan economics –interpreted locally as being
unwilling to understand elite needs.
Conclusion
The ruling MPLA has for many years with justification been
able to blame the war for its repressive and unaccountable
policies. Subsequently it has been able to point to the need
to move from a war economy and polity into transition. But
we do not have to believe the rhetoric over transition and
its difficulties if we consider Angola as is in a ‘steady
state’ with economic and political policies marked heavily
by the structures established by war and from command
economy and state. It is able to use its oil wealth for
elite accumulation and for overcoming resistance to its
rule. Clientilism has largely replaced more repressive
measures. As its oil wealth and ultra deep oil exploration
possibilities increase it is increasingly able to ride out
any international disquiet over its policies –
accessing available if expensive oil-backed loans and able
to put resources where it wishes. There are some constraints
in the present and future
- such as wanting to present itself as not so corrupt to
attract FDI, a desire to deal with its debts and its
dependence on the maintenance of high oil prices – but not
sufficiently to disturb the equanimity of the elite and its
accumulation strategy. Any opposition can be marginalized,
bought off or in the last resort got rid of.
Despite rhetoric on increased transparency, accountability
and democratization little has yet been accomplished to
overcome the gap between ruler and ruled. Apart from some
NGOs it seems there is little help they can expect in terms
of support or pressure from the international community. As
well as the increased autonomy for the
elite with high oil prices and vulnerable supply, there
are significant shifts in international and regional
alliances in the face of the ‘Chinese threat’ and the war
against terror.
Dr. Steve Kibble is Advocacy Coordinator for
Africa/Yemen, Progressio This is a revised version of a talk
to the Africa Business Group at SOAS, 16 March 2006, and
based on a chapter on Angola for Africa Yearbook 2005 to be
published by Brill on behalf of Africa Institute in Hamburg,
Afrikacentrum, Leiden and Nordic Afrika Instituut Uppsala. A
longer version has been commissioned by the Review of
African Political Economy for publication later in 2006.
Visit http://www.roape.org/
for more information. This article first appeared in
Pambazuka (www.pambazuka.org).
References
[1] IMF, 2005, Staff Report for the 2004 Article IV
Consultation, IMF Country Report No. 05/228, Washington DC:
IMF July.
[2] Thanks to David Sogge (personal communication) for this
insight.
[3] In January 2006, the National Statistics Institute
estimated it was averaging 18.5% over the year whilst the
EIU country report thought 23.4% more likely (EIU Angola
Country Report December 2005 p. 11).
[4] French businessman Pierre Falcone was suspected of
embezzling funds flowing from the restructuring of Angola's
debt to Russia.
[5] although $37 million held in a Luxemburg-based bank
account owned by a Panama-based company called Camparal,
which belongs to Dos Santos allegedly vanished into tax
havens
[6] Over 150 political parties continued to exist, many
with identical platforms, undemocratic internal practices
and with little parliamentary initiative, coalitions between
opposition forces or promulgation of alternative policies or
monitoring of government policies. A recent law on political
parties allows government funding of parties not
represented in the National Assembly during the election
period (Diário da República 1.7.05).
[7] Over 150 political parties continued to exist, many with
identical platforms, undemocratic internal practices and
with little parliamentary initiative, coalitions between
opposition forces or promulgation of alternative policies or
monitoring of government policies. A recent law on political
parties allows government funding of parties not represented
in the National Assembly during the election period (Diário
da República 1.7.05).
[8] Sogge personal communication.
[9] With estimated external debts of $10 billion Angola
wants IMF approval of its would-be home-grown program
through a Policy Support Instrument (PSI) to tackle its $1.5
- $1.8 billion Paris Club debt and provide a seal of
approval for creditors wanting assurances before discussing
debt rescheduling.
[10] According to Global Witness, although the French press
says over $3 billion.
Global Page Hunger
Notes Home Page
|