|
Page 1 of 2 In its objections to proposed land and passport regulations at the latest East Africa Legislative Assembly session, Tanzania reveals a longstanding reluctance to fully commit to an accelerated regional integration in the East African Community (EAC). However, is this really about land? What are the options for Tanzania – in or out?
In 1997, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania agreed to revive the defunct East African Community (EAC) two decades after its collapse, even if just for economic reasons – they looked towards the example of the European Union (EU) as one of the recent examples for smaller economies that band together to improve their position in the global economy. The second attempt began in 2000, and in 2007, francophone neighbours Rwanda and Burundi joined the Anglophone bloc. Overall progress is, unsurprisingly, hobbled as much by constraints in institutional capacities as by the member countries’ intention to protect their own interests – and often vested interests of specific groups and players. Some significant achievements have been made, including the establishment of a customs union, enhanced coordination in macro and budgetary policies - the three original countries of the EAC, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania actually present their budgetary plans to their respective parliaments simultaneously , shared management of Lake Victoria; and the revival of regional co-operation in a number of fields.
But if newcomer Rwanda has been particularly active since joining, one of the founding members, Tanzania, appears more and more reluctant. Many Tanzanians feel that Tanzania has nothing to gain, but everything to lose, in the proposed integration scheme. At the two-week session of the East Africa Legislative Assembly (EALA) in December 2008, Tanzania expressed objections to the purchase of land by foreigners, arguing that the other EAC members should instead consider the Tanzanian system of public land ownership, and also argued against the use of an East African passport.
Land Grabbing?
Land – a complex issue across all sub-Saharan Africa - appears to be one of the most contentious issues in Tanzania’s relationships with its neighbours, and suspicions run deep, whether substantiated or not: Harid Mkali, a member of the Tanzanian diaspora residing in London and a regular commentator in Tanzanian newspapers, sees no genuine commitment to the cause of political union by either Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi, but suspects an intended land grab: “The truth of the matter is that the critical shortage of arable land in Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi is forcing their politicians to think the unthinkable. (But) those leaders need to find lasting solutions to the land problems in their own countries first before they can consider themselves an attractive proposition for political union with any other country,” he says. Joseph Mfinyanga, a business man in Arusha, Tanzania’s second largest city, and the proprietor of Sundance, a restaurant that serves game meat a few kilometers from Tarangire National Park in Northern Tanzania, believes that the East African Community is not only a bad idea, but will lead to massive economic losses for Tanzanians.
Owning over 3,000 acres of land, Mfinyanga would rather the rest of the East African countries remain out of Tanzania and instead follow Tanzania’s policy and nationalise and redistribute land to their citizens according to need and not wealth. “I own about 3,000 acres of land here in Tanzania. This is a lot of land in either Kenya or Uganda, and creating a federation will just mean an influx of land grabbing by the Kenyans. This will severely disenfranchise Tanzanians,” he says. Many Tanzanians believe that it is the underlying intention of Kenya’s cross-border interest to take over Tanzania’s land. Adding to those fears were the violent post-election conflicts in Kenya in early 2008 that were partly driven by long-standing grievances over land issues.
Uneasy Neighbourly Relations
Kenya remains one of Tanzania’s largest investors – in fact, the country has more investments in Tanzania than South Africa, according to the 2007 investment records from the Tanzania Investment Centre (TIC). Britain had 595 projects worth USD1,115m, with at least 232,030 jobs. In the same year, Kenya had 249 projects valued at USD958.21m, employing 37,511 people. Kenya is most active in tourism, agriculture, manufacturing, transportation and commercial banks.
But resentments against Kenyans are often pronounced: “The Kenyans have even tried to put the blame on Tanzania for the collapse of the East African Community (EAC) back in 1977, which is a particularly distorted version of the community’s demise. How can the mutual trust crucial in matters of international co-operation be rebuilt with people who manipulate history so blatantly,” fumes Harid Mkali. Many Tanzanians see Kenya’s past actions real and imagined as suspicious reflective of the intention to overrun Tanzania.
Tanzania actually led the EAC in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI). According to the United Nations’ 2007 World Investment Report, Tanzania’s FDI stood at USD377m in 2006, compared to Uganda with USD307m, Burundi with USD290m, Kenya with USD51m and Rwanda with 15m. But this inflow of money did not always translate into a positive experience of globalisation: Overall, Tanzania’s FDI is dominated by investments in the mining sector – a capital-intense industry that tends to create a niche economy and does not contribute much to employment creation. As in so many other commodity-rich countries, the terms and conditions of mining licenses are often kept deliberately secret.
Critics argue that Tanzania’s government did not negotiate the most beneficial arrangements for the Tanzanian taxpayer in the first place, and then allege other irregularities. “A Golden Opportunity? How Tanzania is Failing to Benefit from Gold Mining”, written by Mark Curtis and Tundu Antiphas Lissu, argues that the country is loosing millions of dollars because of the country’s tax laws and the practices of the leading mining companies. According to Curtis and Lissu’s description of auditor’s report, four companies are alleged to have over-declared losses of USD502m between 1999 and 2003, representing a loss in government revenue of USD132.5m. The auditors also reportedly complained of thousands of missing documents and accused the mining companies of frustrating their investigation. Leading mining companies in Tanzania, amongst them Canadian Barrick and South African Anglo Gold Ashanti (AGA) have rubbished the report, but there is a feeling that even in the sector that is most attractive for investors, Tanzanians are being cheated.
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>
|
