Why Rwanda's clockwork election is a bad day for democracy

Why Rwanda's clockwork election is a bad day for democracy

British colonialists and their dogs and the British media reporters who have been swamping Rwanda are impressed by the appearance of the capital of Rwanda. They say that the capital is clean and has first class hotels.
British have been praising Kagame for economic achievements on the basis of what they see in the capital. As you are aware Western people, especially British people are interested more in where they will sleep. They do not care about hunger, diseases and malnutrition that characterise daily lives of most African people.
The British are happy that their foreign aid has been well used and that Kagame should have the salary three times higher than David Cameroon’s salary. They are happy that their foreign is used to maintain the Rwandan military personnel and unelected members of parliament.
For the British, this what they believe to be international development!
-------------------------------------------------------------
By Mary Riddell Politics Last updated: August 9th, 2010
Rwanda's capital, Kigali, has been transformed since the genocide. Skyscrapers are sprouting up and the streets are swept daily (Photo: Corbis)
Today, Rwanda elects its president. Early reports from the capital, Kigali, suggest a high turn-out and oiled efficiency at polling stations. This comes as no surprise to anyone who has visited Rwanda. Give or take the gated communities of the Home Counties, there are few more orderly places on earth.
Citizens of the capital are required to turn up, on appointed days, to sweep streets on which no stray litter ever blows. Inspectors drop by to make sure that people have tidied their homes and made their beds. The smarter hotels sell home-made jam and pastries. None of this is likely to change under a new president – if only because the old one is 100 per cent certain to be re-elected.
Paul Kagame’s serious opponents have been barred from standing, leaving only puppet parties to seek his displacement. A political rival and a disobliging journalist have been found murdered in recent weeks, and some have sought to implicate the Kagame government, which denies any involvement.
These events and suspicions should alarm western leaders and, in particular, David Cameron. Britain gives Rwanda £55 million in aid money each year, and Kigali is the favourite destination of any minister in search of aid tourism. President Kagame’s residence is an oasis of westernised home comforts, with bougainvilleas blooming among watered lawns and Ivy-league educated aides in attendance.
When I visited him there last year, I asked him about the Rwandan citizens who have grown rich on the proceeds of minerals smuggled in from DR Congo, his dirt poor and war-ravaged neighbour, and he dismissed talk of minerals fuelling wars as “superficial.” No one asks too many questions of President Kagame, least of all the British ministers who describe his country as corruption-free.
The shadow of exploitation and suspicions of injustice and much worse hang over a regime whose flaws are always excused by the genocide suffered by the Rwandan people. While the terrible nature of the slaughter is not in doubt, Rwanda has since grown rich on genocide guilt.
Paul Kagame’s inevitable re-election is very far from being the worst thing that could befall his country. But the west, the British government included, has fallen into the trap of mistaking a functioning state for democracy. The two are not the same, and western leaders should dare to say so
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/maryriddell/100050118/why-rwandas-clockwork-election-is-a-bad-day-for-democracy/