The Sharpeville Massacre led to international condemnation of South Africa
In 1964 Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was imprisoned for life by the then Apartheid government in South Africa. They moved rapidly to disband democracy movements in that country and imprison all their leaders. The African National Congress (ANC) was banned and its leaders went into exile, spawning an international movement to demand freedom in South Africa. The ANC regularly called for sovereign nations to intercede in the South African state. After the Sharpeville Massacre , in which 566 children were killed during a peaceful protest, the world chose to express their condemnation of the internal behaviour of a sovereign state - South Africa. In 1993 Nelson Mandela was presented with the Nobel Peace Prize, to highlight his plight, as well as reward his bravery, in standing up to a bunch of autocratic anti-democratic thugs. He became South Africa's first democratically elected head of state when the ANC became the government in 1994.
Recently South Africa, and the ANC government, won the right to sit at the UN Security Council. Now they have the opportunity to pitch their own vision to the world.
In 1990 Aung San Suu Kyi won elections in (then) Burma decisively. She was immediately detained and placed under house arrest by the military junta who are still in power. They moved rapidly to disband democracy movements in that country and imprison all their leaders. In 1991 Aung San Suu Kyi was presented with the Nobel Peace Prize, both to highlight her plight, as well as reward her bravery, in standing up to a bunch of autocratic anti-democratic thugs. She remains under house arrest. Her people remain brutalised and oppressed.
Which is why the South African government sided with the Burmese military junta against a UN resolution calling on the Burmese government to ease repression. The resolution was proposed by the United States and took two years to agree upon within the United Nations.
A lot of people have had a lot to say about the US since it went it alone - without the participation and support of the United Nations - in their war with Iraq in 2003.
Everyone has an opinion on how awful and stupid the US response has been. Many claim that the US has undermined the United Nations and reduced their authority. Maybe people, and nations, should be asking whether their own hypocrisy has earned them the right to be heard by the world's most powerful democracy. If the United Nations is a toothless, gutless and totally hypocritical talk-shop it is hardly the fault of the United States. It is the fault of its members.
As Jonathan Katzenellenbogen says in the Business Day, "Voting this way, SA emerged looking comfortable with one of the world’s most brutal military regimes. Whose side is SA on, anyway?"
Imagine a product so important that it requires special treatment. Supply considered so essential by the state that it must be guaranteed through the creation of state-owned monopolies. State monopolies so autocratic that no competitive products are allowed? What products would you consider that important?
The South African government has quite a list: fuel, electricity, education, telecommunications, transport, and information (amongst others).
Sure, there are private petrol, education, transport and telecommunications companies, but that is just icing. The core components, without which the rest cannot operate, belong to the state.
Many countries consider these types of products worthy of controlling. Does it serve the public?
Witness the furore in Germany when Russia cut off their gas supplies during a dispute with Belarus. Eskom, the South African state energy supplier, is suffering the indignity of demand that is “higher than was anticipated for this period," according to the company's managing director for transmission, Jacob Marog.
Only state-owned monopolies can talk like that. Private companies discuss the unprecedented demand for their products and the opportunity for growth.
Apple's iPod sales increased by 50% compared with the same period a year ago. Tim Cook, Apple's chief operating officer said: "iPod demand was extraordinary," over the recent festive season. Their new iPhone is to run on US-based Cingular’s telecommunications network. Apple would be very surprised if Cingular capped the amount of bandwidth their subscribers could use and, in so doing, prevented them from downloading songs from Apple iTunes.
Yet this is precisely what Telkom, the South African state telecommunications monopoly does. They cap bandwidth. They cap telephone bills. They cap lines.
Reuters, the media and information group, which has been expanding in countries such as India, is not investing in South Africa. CEO Tom Glocer said his company was reluctant to do the same in SA because of Telkom’s high prices and poor bandwidth.
This is the real cost of state monopolies. Not only isn’t there enough of the product that was considered so important in the first place. But you’re unable to find any other supply.
A single supplier of anything is like having a single supplier of toilet paper. You’ll only notice the problem when you most need it and, by then, it’s far too late.
If you ever wondered who all those people are sitting behind notebook computers enjoying cups of coffee and having long discussions are – those are the most talented at work. They set up short-term projects, work together, collapse the project when it’s done, move somewhere else, do it again. The type of job insecurity that highly skilled people demand is anathema to the union movement.
Yet, if you are unemployed and struggling to find a job in Africa, you are also probably unskilled. If you are skilled – and especially if you have good technical ((skills)) – then you’re probably working harder than you’ve ever worked in your life while earning well.
In a recent international survey, the Corporate Executive Board polled senior human resources managers around the world about their main concerns. Some 62% worried about company-wide ((talent)) shortages. More than two-thirds declared “attracting and retaining” talent was their number one concern.
At the same time a major demographic shift is taking place: the baby boomers are getting ready to retire. By one estimate half the top people at America’s 500 leading companies will retire over the next five years.
International competition for ((recruiting)) the best and brightest is hotting up. Infosys, the Indian technology giant, spends $ 100 million a year on training.
It is no wonder that, with all this competition, TCS – an Indian software company intending to hire 30 000 software engineers over 2007 – has a sign at the entrance to their building: “Warning, trespassers will be recruited.”
This is wonderful news for anyone who had the good fortune and ability to get a technical qualification. If you’re unskilled and struggling it’s a disaster.
African countries have to compete on an international level with everyone else to ensure that critical skills are available to support their economies. Most, with their inept governments and chronic instability, are doing a phenomenal job of exporting their best and brightest to other countries.
For those who say, “What should we care about talent, we have all these unemployed people, let them work.” The simple answer is that any business requires a core of talented, skilled individuals who will set up and run the show. The balance of employees are less skilled and don’t have the abilities necessary to create business for themselves. If they did, they’d already be doing so.
Continuing integration of markets will make jobs around the world more subject to competitive pressures. "As trade expands and technologies rapidly diffuse to developing countries, unskilled workers around the world - as well as some lower-skilled white collar workers - will face increasing competition across borders," says Uri Dadush, Director of the World Bank's Development Prospects Group and International Trade Department. "Rather than trying to preserve existing jobs, governments need to support dislocated workers and provide them with new opportunities. Improving education and labour market flexibility is a key part of the long-run solution."
Without this, even should they stabilise, African countries won't have the core group of ambitious, talented locals necessary to create sufficient wealth to create the virtuous circle of stability and growth.
