Leaders we get, leaders we deserve

One is inclined to believe that every member of Malawi’s 121-strong delegation to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York, USA, has some official, beneficial role to play — and not as layabouts who have tagged along just to sing President Peter Mutharika’s praises. One further hopes that their absence from the summit could have done Malawi more harm than good.

You see, government has been reticent to provide information about who has made it into such an excessive delegation. Where government has attempted to explain the bloated delegation, its statements have been laced with venom directed at no one in particular but scattered in the four winds for maximum effect.

Statements have been flying from the State House, the Ministry of Information, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation—essentially anyone who feels they have a stake to defend in the matter has made their voices heard. I’m actually surprised the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) hasn’t got in on the act.

That could be partly explained on account that its secretary general, EcklenKudontoni, is taking part in Mutharika’s annual jaunt to the US. Who knows, Kudontoni might teach the Democrats and the Republicans a thing or two about how to rig elections—I can’t think of any other reason that merits his inclusion on the delegation. But I digress.

While Malawi—the world’s poorest country—has sent over 120 delegates to the summit, Nigeria, one of Africa’s economic giants (with the biggest population at 178 million), reportedly has a delegation of 22 people including President Muhammadu Buhari (and a few layabouts—it is an African affliction!). Rub your eyes and read that figure again: 22!

Did Malawi send the right people to petition our needs? Would a leaner and streamlined delegation have provided better value for money than a party of chiefs and political functionaries?

Government’s defence on the matter has largely relied on arrogance and subterfuge, lies and more lies and going further to accuse its critics of raising a storm in a teacup.

But, if, indeed, there was nothing underhand or out of touch in the composition of the delegation, government would have quelled all the ruckus by simply releasing the list of the Malawi delegation: stating who they are, why government feels they merit their place in New York more than in Lilongwe, why taxpayers should have funded them or who funded them and what are the incremental benefits of such a large entourage.

Don’t tell me that Malawi stands to benefit from such a summit. It is not as if this is the first time that Malawi has exported an entire village for the UNGA. We have been there before; but current statistics don’t seem to support that we are getting any returns from our extravagance—we are regressing, as a matter of fact.

The fact that various government spokespersons are speaking in unspecified generalities suggests someone high up knows they did wrong or they are afraid to burn their fingers.

Particularly disconcerting has been the arrogance of George Chaponda, foreign affairs minister, who has told us, not in as many words, to piss off and leave them alone. He has gone further to direct us to exert our energies on Cashgate and in “bringing back people in hiding abroad”.

I take these insults as diversionary tactics, but, sadly, they won’t wash.

Suggesting that we should take our eyes off this matter is a tacit admission that something is amiss with the UN jaunt and shows lack of appreciation about where we are coming from. Cashgate was about lack of governance in much the same way that this is.

This is the same mentality that afflicted us when we all lost track of the mess under former President Joyce Banda and focussed on the muck of the DPP. By the time we woke to reality, billions of kwacha had vanished into thin air. No, Hon. Chaponda, thanks but no thanks for the advice; we will scrutinise the past mess with the same gusto as we do with the present. The present must be corrected here and now, and not be done retrospectively as we are doing with Cashgate.

While belonging to and participating in the activities of the international community is paramount, it is not as if our losses would be seismic if we skipped the UNGA. Besides, it is not as if APM would deliver a speech that would make everyone sit up and listen. It will be the same bland, chest-beating and recycled speech which subsequent leaders of Malawi have delivered. No one would miss his absence at the UNGA. Uhuru Kenyatta, Kenya’s president, would perhaps be missed, but even he has elected to skip the president’s club to attend to pressing matters home—something which Mutharika would have done, what with 2.8 million people facing hunger.

Among the cocktail of lies we have been fed is that Mutharika moved out of the plush Waldorf Astoria and settled in a Hilton hotel to cut on costs. No, he didn’t. To imagine that Mutharika left Malawi, arrived in New York, drove to Waldorf Astoria, booked in, discovered it was too expensive, moved out, drove around the corner and chanced upon a cheaper room in a Hilton hotel and booked in is a tale too ludicrous to be made by a government that wants to be taken seriously. Ask anyone who wanted to book a hotel room during the Sadc Summit in 2013 in Lilongwe—even in run-down motels in Likuni. It was impossible. And to imagine Mutharika just walked in and found a hotel waiting for him when the entire world has descended on New York!

Indeed, we deserve the leaders we get—including their excesses.