When the line has been crossed

Joyce Banda’s first months in office were, just like her predecessors’, a beautiful sunset that was mistaken for dawn. But there is something in her political sunset that is unprecedented. EPHRAIM NYONDO writes.

Since April last year, when President Joyce Banda took over the presidential seat, Sarah Sanyahumbi, chairperson of the Common Approach to Budgetary Support (Cabs), had been the face of Malawi’s renewed relations with its development partners.

But that was until Thursday last week. Not only did Sanyahumbi lead the Cabs in announcing the withholding of $150 million budgetary support for the October to December 2013 quarter.

Sanyahumbi, while dropping the bomb, even gave an emotive speech—one that revealed her deep sense of frustration over Malawi’s economic governance system.

“We have spent considerable time and money on various reform programmes and capacity building over the years. What do we have to show for it?” she asked.

There was nothing, really, to show apart from “those systems [they built capacity on] stealing from the people of Malawi”.

Surely, no sensible donor would tolerate that? That is why Sanyahumbi was uncompromising in her conclusion.

“As far as we are concerned, the line has been crossed, once that line has been crossed, you cannot go back to what you had before,” she said.

It is easy to understand why Sanyahumbi has turned from a diplomat with a smiling face to a frustrated one.

Yet she is not the first and, arguably, may not be the last diplomat to feel that way. The story of diplomats getting frustrated and packing their financial support home due to poor economic governance is not new.

It happened between 2001 and 2003. Just like today, a number of donor nations withdrew aid when then president Bakili Muluzi became known for his extravagance, running a nation crippled with heinous levels of corruption.

One cannot even imagine talking about the tortuous 2010 to 2012 period. Former president the late Bingu wa Mutharika’s poor political and economic governance, something which angered the donors, unleashed a wave of terror on the land as Treasury lost nearly half of its annual budget.

Thus, the decision by the Cabs last Thursday is only a third scene of an old play that Muluzi and Mutharika performed.

The tragedy for Banda, however, is that, although it took seven years for her two predecessors to lose budgetary support, it has only taken her a few months.

She spent the best part of last year flying from one capital to another, pleading with donors to resume financial support after Mutharika’s arrogance had chased them away. It is unimaginable, therefore, that she would lose their trust despite the time, energy and money she invested in her efforts.

What could be the problem?

Political commentator Rafiq Hajat sees nothing but the election fever in the unending cycle of donor-government fallout.

“Muluzi, just like Mutharika, was a darling of the donors in his first term. The time the two, in their second term, began to think about next elections, hell broke loose.

“Muluzi lost much of the donors when he went all out using public resources to campaign for his Third Term bid. Mutharika’s fallout is traced to when he began campaigning for his brother and eliminating potential competitors,” he says.

This, explains Hajat, could, to a large extent, explain the current fallout disguised as cash-gate.

“This is why we have always called for a proper mechanism of political party financing. There is a big problem with incumbency of using public resources to campaign for their political agenda.

“They end up, and they hardly care, going into conflict with development partners who pour a lot of money in the country to support key social service sectors. In the end, its ordinary people, not politicians, who suffer,” he says.

However, though both Muluzi and Mutharika’s government suffered the donor-pullout effect, analysts predict doom for Banda given the context of the economic situation in the country.

“We now have a floated currency compared to earlier situation when it was a little controlled. Even worse, this is not a tobacco season which, through availability of foreign currency, at least strengthens our currency. To mean, being an importing nation, right now, I can say our major source of forex is donor inflow,” says James Chirwa, a Master of Economics student at Chancellor College.

Given such an economic background, and also with the season of fertiliser purchase and transportation under the Farm Input Subsidy Programme (Fisp), Chirwa warns that the demand for foreign currency will be high.

“Our economy is still recovering but with this demand for foreign currency amid donors withholding their support, I can foresee the worst that we have never had before,” he says.

Of course, embattled Finance Minister Maxwell Mkwezalamba, as expected, sounded upbeat.

“Despite developments at Capital Hill, government would remain committed to the fundamental principles of budget support which are sound public financial management, accountability and effective anti-corruption measures,” he told The Nation on Friday.

But behind his cool-headedness there is a government which is seeking election in few months, yet the donors’ withdrawal, according to political scientist Joseph Chunga, is quite a game changer for President Banda’s 2014 dreams.

“International popularity has, for years, been a political tool leaders use to sell themselves internally,” he says.

He adds: “A leader’s international popularity through positions at blockings like Sadc and AU, and also through being in good terms with the IMF and donor nations has had tremendous effects on the leader’s internal popularity in Malawi.”

To mean, the decision by the donors last week has, to a greater extent, begun to change the positive image the international community had for President Banda.

“She has always taken on the opposition for resuscitating the economy by managing to bring back the donors into the fold. Of course, that is a plus. Now that the same donors have left her, what will be her message?” wonders Chunga.

Hajat argues that it is not just the donor’s withdrawal that is redefining President Banda’s 2014 popularity.

“The entire cash-gate affair has, direct and indirect, implications on her and some, with the forensic audit underway, will be adverse,” he says.

He explains: “What if the audit establishes that she is involved? Won’t that be the end of her 2014 dreams?”

Hajat further notes that President Banda should not be misled with the adage that it is mostly people in the urban areas who are following the cash-gate.

“Malawians everywhere are following this and they are feeling every pinch of the effects. There is a lot of interconnection happening these days through increased coverage of radios. So this won’t be easy for her. There is a national consciousness underway,” he says.

Surely, last Thursday’s decision, however Banda looks at it, represents her sudden fall from political grace—a mark of a beautiful sunset that was mistaken for a dawn.