ZAMZAM ABDI ADAN THE NEW MINISTER OF EDUCATION SOMALILAND

Zamzam Abdi Adan the former principal of Ahmed Guray School is the new Minister of Education in Somaliland. This news has elicited a positive reaction from many people in the educational community in Somaliland.

http://www.somalilandtimes.net/sl/2010/445/4.shtml

FIBRE OPTIC CABLE FOR SOMALILAND

MTN's Trevor Martin's, who also serves as the EASSy consortium's chairperson, announced in Sandton this week that the cable had come in ahead of schedule and almost 10% under its $300-million budget.
The 10 000km cable lands in South Africa, Mozambique, Madagascar, the Comoros, Tanzania, Kenya, Somaliland, Djibouti and Sudan.
It connects with multiple Asian and European cables in Djibouti and Sudan.
The commercial launch of the EASSy cable follows the launch of the Seacom cable in July 2009 and Telkom's SAT-3 cable.
The Seacom cable was privately funded, while EASSy has seen significant investment from governments and major operators along the East Coast of Africa.
Investors include MTN, Neotel, Telkom, Vodacom, British Telecom, Botswana Telecoms, Bharti Airtel, Dalkom Somalia, Comoros Telecom, Mauritius Telecom and France Telecom, among others.
Unlike South Africa, for many African countries the EASSy cable represents their second undersea cable, which is vitally important in stimulating competition, but also in creating backup capacity in case one of the cables has a fault or is damaged on the sea bed.
"We are confident that this is the most reliable system serving the African continent," said Jacques van der Walt, the chairperson of the EASSy consortium's procurement committee.
One small hiccup was that the cable does not land in Mogadishu, Somalia, due to the threat of piracy.

Chris Wood, the CEO of WIOCC -- an investor in the EASSy cable -- said the cable would land in the north of Somaliland and service Somalia through this landing station.
Wood said that the consortium still planned to land in Mogadishu once the threats of piracy had been minimized. He said, however, that this was probably a year or two away.
Source: The Mail & Guardian

MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS VS MEN

Interesting blog of interest...

The Millennium Development....Guys?

By Jodi Jacobson, Editor-in-Chief, RH Reality Check

Consider these truths:

Men don't get pregnant.

Completely preventable complications of pregnancy, labor, unsafe abortion and AIDS-related illnesses remain the leading causes of death and disability among women in countries throughout the world due to lack of political will, lack of funding, and the politicization of sexual and reproductive health by fundamentalist religious and political actors.

Women now make up the majority of those infected with HIV worldwide and over two-thirds of those infected in sub-Saharan Africa.

Women and girls continue to face profound discrimination in access to education, employment, and political power in virtually every country (yes, including the United States). Women continue to experience high rates of sexual violence and coercion, high rates of child marriage, and low rates of access to basic reproductive and sexual health care, including safe abortion.

The health and well-being of newborns, infants, and children rests primarily on women. In communities riven by poverty, violence and discrimination, the death of a mother too often results in the neglect, deteriorating health, abuse, or death of her child(ren).

Consider also that virtually all of these issues remained invisible--or just plain unimportant--to the largely male power structures in every country for the past several decades, until the global women's movement gained traction in their fight to put them on the global agenda.

Given these realities, it would seem that appointments to a recently convened United Nations High-level Advocacy Group focused on pushing for progress on the Millennium Development Goals would take pains to put high-level women in charge--at least in equal numbers to their male counterparts--of advocating for maternal health, child health, and HIV and AIDS, as well as those "other things" like economic development, in which women, as all the development literature has repeated ad nauseum for 40 years, are essential actors.

Someone, somewhere, did not get the memo.

A "final" July 1 2010 list of prominent individuals circulated by the United Nations End Poverty 2015 Millennium Campaign comprising the "Global Advocacy Team" indicates that not one woman has been assigned to Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 (to reduce child mortality), MDG 5 (to improve maternal health), or MDG 6 (to combat HIV and AIDS and malaria).

This is, quite simply, astounding.

And yet, its not. Because in the pattern of all things having to do with women's health--whether we are talking about Utah or Nebraska, Uganda or the United Nations--there are other truths. Men continue to control the agenda and to decide how much or how little money and attention will be paid to ending the epidemic of pregnancy- and sexually-transmitted infection-related deaths and illnesses that robs millions of women of their lives and health every year worldwide. Men continue to decide what priorities will be on the table when they do "pay attention" to these issues, and when they won't, for reasons of their own political or financial agendas or their own ideological or political affiliations or all of the above, address honestly one of the leading and most preventable causes of pregnancy-related death and illness, that being unsafe abortion. Men continue to decide whether they will, for the sake of ideology cloaked as "common ground," push for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs that leave women disproportionately vulnerable to HIV and AIDS, leave the issue of safe abortion out of research and international documents, confront other issues like stoning as "adulterers" women who've been raped, or "accept" that ending the war in Afghanistan likely means leaving women to the "mercy" of the Taliban. Men decide whether we can talk about women's health writ large, or even their sexual and reproductive health writ large, or only about the mommas and the babies.

So when I received from a colleague the PDF file containing the list, having been here and done this before, I knew to some extent I already knew the story. I also knew my obligations and therefore in an effort to find out more about this group yesterday, I called numerous colleagues in the advocacy and policy field as well as the UN Campaign office itself. I also emailed a contact in the office of the UN Secretary General. I did not hear back from any of the UN spokespersons as of this writing, but of those colleagues I reached they were, to a person, shocked at the composition of assignments on the list. Most had not yet heard that this group had been convened, and a couple suggested that the role might largely be for public relations, as the September 2010 UN Summit on Millenium Development Goals in New York approaches. In other words, every one of these colleagues had virtually the same reaction as I did on receiving this list: A combination of "How could this happen?" "Where are the women's advocacy leaders that have worked so hard on these issues the past 20 years?" and "Business as usual."

Let's be clear: Every one of the people on the list of UN MDG campaign "advocates" is a prominent person. The list includes Ted Turner, who provided the original funding a decade ago for the establishment of the UN Foundation, under the umbrella of which--in full disclosure--RH Reality Check now exists. The list includes, but is not limited to well-respected men such as Jeffrey Sachs (all MDGs) director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, Bill Gates (MDGs 1, 4, 5, and 6), founder of Microsoft, and of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Julio Frenk, Dean of the Harvard School of Public Health (MDGs 4,5,6, and 8), Akin Adesina, Vice President of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) (MDG 1, extreme poverty and hunger), Muhammed Yunus, founder of the Grameen Bank (MDG 8 on poverty), Philippe Douste-Blazy (France) UN Special Advisor on innovative financing for development (MDGs 4, 5, 6 and 8), and Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda and a co-chair of the group.

The women include, among others, Stine Bosse (Denmark), CEO of TrygVesta Group, Chairman of Børnefonden (The Childrens’ Fund) (MDG 3 on gender equality and the empowerment of women); Wangari Maathai (Kenya) Nobel Peace Prize Winner, environmental and political activist (MDG 7 on environmental sustainability); Dho Young-Shim (Republic of Korea) Chairperson of the UN World Tourism Organization’s Sustainable Tourism for Eliminating Poverty (ST-EP) Foundation (MDG 2 on universal primary education); HHS Sheikha Mozah Bint Nasser (Qatar) First Lady, Chairperson of the Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development (MDG 2) and Graça Machel (South Africa / Mozambique), former First Lady, advocate for women’s and children’s rights (MDG 3, gender equality and the empowerment of women).

So why is it that Bob Geldof, the Irish singer and political advocate is being assigned to advocate for "all MDGs"--including those addressing maternal and child health and HIV and AIDS, when Michelle Bachelet, the former president of Chile who grappled directly with high rates of unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion in her own country, is assigned only to the MDG focused on gender equality and empowerment? (The MDG, by the way, which everyone agrees is the lowest priority in terms of funding and which also can't be separated from the others.) Geldof and his colleague Bono--no matter how well-intentioned--both are associated with the ONE campaign, which, while it advocates for ending poverty in Africa, has also advocated for abstinence-only-until marriage programs in PEPFAR, to deny HIV-positive women access to family planning services, and against efforts to address safe abortion as an integral aspect of women's health and rights.

Why is it that Sachs is covering all MDGs including all of those of greatest concern to women's health, but Graça Machel, Sheikha Mozah Bint Nasser, Bachelet and Young-Shim are not? Machel and Maathai both actually live in and are from sub-Saharan Africa, the region in which pregnancy-related death and illness, complications of unsafe abortion, HIV infections and deaths among women from AIDS-related illnesses, violence and all the rest are perhaps more pervasive than anywhere else. To whom does this make sense?

Why is it that Bill Gates is covering all the MDGs of greatest concern to women, but real women leaders, including those who fought to put these issues on the global agenda and have studied, worked on, and staffed actual health facilities working to promote both prevention and treatment are not? It is true that the Gates foundation is providing $1.5 billion for maternal and child health programs over the next five years, a laudable contribution. It is however one that will almost certainly fail to make real headway on reducing the toll on women, families, communities, and economies of pregnancy-related illness and death in part because the Gates Foundation will not--whether out of political or religious or other concerns--address or apparently even speak about unsafe abortion, which in some countries accounts for a third or a half of all maternal deaths. Moreover, the representation of funders in this group creates an immediate conflict of interest, reducing the likelihood that any uncomfortable issues will be raised. The Gates Foundation funds Sachs' Earth Institute, for example. The ONE Campaign and the Gates Foundation partner on the "Living Proof" Campaign to highlight successful global health initiatives; yet as a colleague pointed out the original materials made no mention of the role of family planning as one of the single most successful health interventions from the seventies to the eighties. And a recent study of maternal mortality funded by the Gates Foundation and published by the Lancet made no mention--not one--of the toll on women of unsafe abortion. [The UN Foundation does not censor content of RH Reality Check in any way.]

The bottom line is this: We can not solve problems if we can not talk about real life. And we can't continue to fool ourselves that we are just "following the lead of what country governments want," when so much of what they want is determined by the funding available to them, and so many of them remain pathologically undemocratic, especially when it comes to the representation of women and their rights.

Why is it that there are only six women in a group of 19? Where are the amazing female physicians, researchers, advocates, youth organizers who work, write, speak, and organize on these issues every day, often with few or no resources? Of the many who are prominently known and have deep legitimacy in the women's movement, could more of those not have been included? What about someone representing the devastating disparities in maternal and infant health outcomes by race and ethnic status in the United States, the part of the "most powerful country" that most resembles a poverty-stricken nation?

What gives? Is someone concerned that a woman like say, Michelle Bachelet, will speak truth to power on issues of greatest concern to women that funders and politicians want otherwise to avoid?

It is clear to me that if women with legitimacy in the women's movement and as social justice and health advocates were leading this effort, many more salient issues would be on the table, including but not limited to safe abortion services and maternal mortality. But that would change the entire power dynamic.

I believe all these people have the best intentions. I also believe the time has long passed when the UN, the U.S., and any and all other political bodies can continue to talk about the importance of women, and keep putting men in charge. It is long past time to confront the "advocacy" groups that continue to put more stock in the concerns of fundamentalist religious groups and far-right politicians than in the lives of real women. Does anyone see the gross irony in talking about "the empowerment of women" when we can't even get equitable distribution on a UN "high-level" advocacy group?

Does anyone else see the even greater irony, as Stephen Lewis, founder of AIDS-Free World and formerly the first UN Special Envoy on HIV/AIDS in Africa, underscored to me "that the better than two-to-one ratio of men to women advocates comes within one week of [the U.N.'s announcement] creating UN Women (the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women), the new international agency for women, while boasting about gender equality"?

Thomas Paine is said to have originated one of my favorite quotes often used by colleagues in the global AIDS movement: "Lead, follow or 'get out the way.'" In other words, if you are not interested in the real problems and the real issues, let others lead.

It's time for women to take the reins on these issues and lead, without apology. It is time for us to confront more directly the power structures that result in the discussion time and again of the same issues with relatively little progress made. And it is time to hold the leadership of the UN and others accountable for putting their own rhetoric into practice.

Source:http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2010/07/07/millennium-developmentguys

OBAMA HOSTS TOWN HALL FOR YOUNG AFRICAN LEADERS IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Africa Project 53 agrees with Obama on how to engage in Somalia and is the model upon which we seek to initiate our activities and engage in the Horn. One of the many possible ways of engaging in the region is by zoning in to the areas that have relative peace and stability and begin working on development activities. Hoping that the positive outcomes will be contagious and spread to other regions in the Horn. The whole region is not at war, most notable the regions in the north of the horn namely Somaliland and Puntland!

"So we desperately want Somalia to succeed....And we want to be a partner with Somalia in that effort, and we will continue to do so...And some of it is financial, some of it is developmental, some of it is being able to help basic infrastructure. In some cases, we may try to find a portion of the country that is relatively stable and start work there to create a model that the rest of the country can then look at and say, this is a different path than the one that we’re taking right now."

President Obama during the Young African Leaders Town Hall Meeting at the White House August 3rd, 2010

The Whole Transcript:
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you, everybody, please have a seat. Have a seat.

Well, good afternoon, everybody.

AUDIENCE: Good afternoon.

THE PRESIDENT: Welcome to the White House, and welcome to the United States of America. And that includes even our friends from Ghana, who beat us in the World Cup. (Laughter.) Where are you? Over there? That's all right. It was close. We’ll see you in 2014. (Laughter.)

It’s my great privilege to welcome all of you to this Young African Leaders Forum. You’ve joined us from nearly 50 countries. You reflect the extraordinary history and diversity of the continent. You’ve already distinguished yourselves as leaders —- in civil society and development and business and faith communities —- and you’ve got an extraordinary future before you.

In fact, you represent the Africa that so often is overlooked -- the great progress that many Africans have achieved and the unlimited potential that you’ve got going forward into the 21st century.

Now, I called this forum for a simple reason. As I said when I was in Accra last year, I don’t see Africa as a world apart; I see Africa as a fundamental part of our interconnected world. Whether it’s creating jobs in a global economy, or delivering education and health care, combating climate change, standing up to violent extremists who offer nothing but destruction, or promoting successful models of democracy and development —- for all this we have to have a strong, self-reliant and prosperous Africa. So the world needs your talents and your creativity. We need young Africans who are standing up and making things happen not only in their own countries but around the world.

And the United States wants to be your partner. So I’m pleased that you’ve already heard from Secretary of State Clinton, and that we’re joined today by leaders from across my administration who are working to deepen that partnership every day.

I can’t imagine a more fitting time for this gathering. This year, people in 17 nations across Sub-Saharan Africa are proudly celebrating 50 years of independence. And by any measure, 1960 was an extraordinary year. From Senegal to Gabon, from Madagascar to Nigeria, Africans rejoiced in the streets —- as foreign flags were lowered and their own were hoisted up. So in 12 remarkable months, nearly one-third of the continent achieved independence —- a burst of self-determination that came to be celebrated as “The Year of Africa” -- at long last, these Africans were free to chart their own course and to shape their own destiny.

Now, 1960, of course, was significant for another reason. Here in the United States of America it was the year that a candidate for president first proposed an idea for young people in our own country to devote a year or two abroad in service to the world. And that candidate was John F. Kennedy, and that idea would become the Peace Corps -- one of our great partnerships with the world, including with Africa.

Now, the great task of building a nation is never done. Here in America, more than two centuries since our independence, we’re still working to perfect our union. Across Africa today, there’s no denying the daily hardships that are faced by so many -- the struggle to feed their children, to find work, to survive another day. And too often, that’s the Africa that the world sees.

But today, you represent a different vision, a vision of Africa on the move -- an Africa that’s ending old conflicts, as in Liberia, where President Sirleaf told me, today’s children have “not known a gun and not had to run”; an Africa that’s modernizing and creating opportunities -- agribusiness in Tanzania, prosperity in Botswana, political progress in Ghana and Guinea; an Africa that’s pursuing a broadband revolution that could transform the daily lives of future generations.

So it’s an Africa that can do great things, such as hosting the world’s largest sporting event. So we congratulate our South African friends. And while it may have been two European teams in the final match, it’s been pointed out that it was really Africa that won the World Cup.

So once again, Africa finds itself at a moment of extraordinary promise. And as I said last year, while today’s challenges may lack some of the drama of 20th century liberation struggles, they ultimately may be even more meaningful, for it will be up to you, young people full of talent and imagination, to build the Africa for the next 50 years.

Africa’s future belongs to entrepreneurs like the small business owner from Djibouti who began selling ice cream and now runs his own accounting practice and advises other entrepreneurs -- that’s Miguil Hasan-Farah. Is Miguil here? There he is right there. Don’t be shy. There you go. (Applause.)

As you work to create jobs and opportunity, America will work with you, promoting the trade and investment on which growth depends. That’s why we’re proud to be hosting the AGOA Forum this week to expand trade between our countries. And today I’ll also be meeting with trade, commerce, and agriculture ministers from across Sub-Saharan Africa. It’s also why our historic Food Security Initiative isn’t simply about delivering food; it’s about sharing new technologies to increase African productivity and self-sufficiency.

Now, no one should have to pay a bribe to get a job or to get government to provide basic services. So as part of our development strategy, we’re emphasizing transparency, accountability, and a strong civil society -- the kind of reform that can help unleash transformational change. So Africa’s future also belongs to those who take charge of that kind of transparency and are serious about anti-corruption measures.

Africa’s future belongs to those who take charge of their health, like the HIV/AIDS counselor from Malawi who helps others by bravely sharing her own experience of being HIV-positive -- that’s Tamara Banda. Where is Tamara? There she is right there. Thank you, Tamara. (Applause.) So our Global Health Initiative is not merely treating diseases; it’s strengthening prevention and Africa’s public health systems. And I want to be very clear. We’ve continued to increase funds to fight HIV/AIDS to record levels, and we’ll continue to do what it takes to save lives and invest in healthier futures.

Africa’s future also belongs to societies that protects the rights of all its people, especially its women, like the journalist in Ivory Coast who has championed the rights of Muslim women and girls —- Aminata Kane-Kone. Where is Aminata? There she is right there. (Applause.) To you and to people across Africa, know that the United States of America will stand with you as you seek justice and progress and human rights and dignity of all people.

So the bottom line is this: Africa’s future belongs to its young people, including a woman who inspires young people across Botswana with her popular radio show, called, “The Real Enchilada” —- and that’s Tumie Ramsden. Where’s Tumie? Right here -- “The Real Enchilada.” (Applause.)

As all of you go to -- as all of you pursue your dreams —- as you go to school, you find a job, you make your voices heard, you mobilize people —- America wants to support your aspirations. So we’re going to keep helping empower African youth —- supporting education, increasing educational exchanges like the one that brought my father from Kenya in the days when Kenyans were throwing off colonial rule and reaching for a new future. And we’re helping to strengthen grassroots networks of young people who believe -- as they’re saying in Kenya today -— “Yes, Youth Can!” “Yes, Youth Can!” (Laughter and applause.)

Now, this is a forum, so we've devoted some time where I can answer some questions. I don't want to do all the talking. I want to hear from you about your goals and how we can partner more effectively to help you reach them. And we want this to be the beginning of a new partnership and create networks that will promote opportunities for years to come.

But I do want to leave you with this. You are the heirs of the independence generation that we celebrate this year. Because of their sacrifice, you were born in independent African states. And just as the achievements of the last 50 years inspire you, the work you do today will inspire future generations.

So -- I understand, Tumie, you like to Tweet. (Laughter.) And she shared words that have motivated so many -- this is what Tumie said: “If your actions inspire others to dream more, to learn more, to do more and become more, then you are a leader.”
So each of you are here today because you are a leader. You’ve inspired other young people in your home countries; you’ve inspired us here in the United States. The future is what you make it. And so if you keep dreaming and keep working and keep learning and don’t give up, then I'm confident that your countries and the entire continent and the entire world will be better for it.

So thank you very much, everybody. (Applause.)

All right, with that, I'm going to take questions. Now, here are the rules -- (laughter.) People, everybody who has a question, they can raise their hand. In order to be fair, I'm going to call girl, boy, girl, boy. We're going to alternate. And try to keep your question relatively short; I'll try to keep my answer relatively short, so I can answer as many questions as possible, because we have a limited amount of time. Okay?

I'm going to start with this young lady, right here. And please introduce yourself and tell me where you're from also

Q Okay. Thank you very much. I will express myself in French, if that is --

THE PRESIDENT: That's fine. Somebody will translate for me? Yes? Go ahead. Just make sure that you stop after each sentence, because otherwise she will forget what you had to say.

Q Thank you very much. (Speaks in French and is translated.) Mr. President, hello. And hello, everybody. I'm Fatima Sungo (phonetic) of Mali. I do have a question for you and I look forward to getting your answer. But before I do so, I'd like to begin by telling you, Mr. President, how truly honored and privileged we feel to be with you today, and how privileged we are to express the voices of African youth, of African young leaders, and of course fully appreciate your recognizing us and giving us the opportunity to be here, and also recognizing our own responsibility to take your voice back home.

I'd like to say that I'm convinced this is an important watershed moment, this is the beginning of important change, the wonderful initiative you had to call us all here. I wonder when did you see that particular light? When did you imagine that bringing us here would be such a good idea? I'm wondering what your thought process was, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, one of the things that happens when you're President is that other people have good ideas and then you take credit for them. (Laughter.) So I want to make sure that I don't take credit for my ideas -- for these ideas -- because the truth is my staff works so hard in trying to find new ways that we can communicate not just to the heads of state, but also at the grassroots.

And the reason, I think, is because when you think about Africa, Africa is the youngest continent. Many of the countries that you represent, half of the people are under 30. And oftentimes if all you’re doing is talking to old people like me, then you’re not reaching the people who are going to be providing the energy, the new initiatives, the new ideas. And so we thought that it would be very important for us to have an opportunity to bring the next generation of leaders together.

That's point number one. Point number two -- and I’m going to be blunt occasionally during this forum, so I hope you don't mind -- sometimes the older leaders get into old habits, and those old habits are hard to break. And so part of what we wanted to do was to communicate directly to people who may not assume that the old ways of doing business are the ways that Africa has to do business.

So in some of your countries, freedom of the press is still restricted. There’s no reason why that has to be the case. There’s nothing inevitable about that. And young people are more prone to ask questions, why shouldn’t we have a free press? In some of your countries, the problem of corruption is chronic. And so people who have been doing business in your country for 20, 30 years, they’ll just throw up their hands and they’ll say, ah, that's the way it is.

But Robert Kennedy had a wonderful saying, where he said, some people see things and ask why, and others see things that need changing and ask, why not. And so I think that your generation is poised to ask those questions, “Why not?” Why shouldn’t Africa be self-sustaining agriculturally? There’s enough arable land that if we restructure how agriculture and markets work in Africa, not only could most countries in Africa feed themselves, but they could export those crops to help feed the world. Why not?

New infrastructure -- it used to be that you had to have telephone lines and very capital intensive in order to communicate. Now we have the Internet and broadband and cell phones, so you -- the entire continent may be able to leapfrog some other places that were more highly developed and actually reach into the future of communications in ways that we can’t even imagine yet. Why not?

So that’s the purpose of this. I also want to make sure that all of you are having an opportunity to meet each other, because you can reinforce each other as you are struggling and fighting in your own countries for a better future. You will now have a network of people that help to reinforce what it is that you’re trying to do. And you know that sometimes change makes you feel lonely. Now you’ve got a group of people who can help reinforce what you’re doing.

Okay. It’s a gentleman’s turn. This is why there are leaders, everybody has something to say. But you don’t have to snap. No, no, no. It’s a guy’s turn -- this gentleman right here.

Q Mr. President, my name is Bai Best (phonetic) from Liberia. The late Dr. Solomon Carter Fuller was the first black -- the first black psychiatrist in America and probably in the world. In my country in Liberia, where there are a lot of great people who make landmark accomplishments both in their nation and in the world, many of them are not recognized for their accomplishments. Today, Dr. Fuller’s name is etched where there is a medical -- there is a psychiatric center named in his honor at a place in Boston. There are many other young African and young Liberian talented people who have great ideas and who want to come back home and contribute to their countries, to the development of their peoples. But many times, their efforts -- their patriotic efforts -- are stifled by corrupt or sometimes jealous officials in government and in other sectors. It’s an age-old problem. Many times, they want to seek -- that basically leads them to seek greener pastures and better appreciation abroad instead of coming back home. What are your thoughts on this?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, this is a problem that’s not unique to Africa. Given different stages of development around the world, one of the problems that poorer countries often have is that the best educated and the most talented have opportunities elsewhere. And so there’s what’s called the “brain drain” -- people saying, I can make 10 times as much money if I’m a doctor in London as I can if I’m a doctor back home.

And so this is a historic problem. Here is the interesting moment that we’re in, though -- if you look at where the greatest opportunities are, they're actually now in emerging markets. There are countries in Africa that are growing 7, 8, 9 percent a year. So if you’re an entrepreneur now with an idea, you may be able to grow faster and achieve more back home that you could here.

Now, it entails greater risk, so it may be safer to emigrate. But it may be that you can actually achieve more, more quickly back home. And so the question is for young leaders like yourselves, where do you want to have the most impact? And you’re probably going to have more impact at home whether you’re a businessman or woman, or you are a doctor or you are an attorney, or you are an organizer. That's probably going to be the place where you can make the biggest change.

Now, you’re absolutely right, though, that the conditions back home have to be right where you can achieve these things. So if you want to go back home and start a business, and it turns out that you have to pay too many bribes to just get the business started, at some point you may just give up.

And that's why one of the things that we’re trying to do -- working with my team -- when we emphasize development, good governance is at the center of development. It’s not separate. Sometimes people think, well, that's a political issue and then there’s an economic issue. No. If you have a situation where you can’t start a business or people don't want to invest because there’s not a clear sense of rule of law, that is going to stifle development.

If farmers have so many middlemen to get their crops to market that they're making pennies when ultimately their crops are being sold for $10, over time that stifles agricultural development in a country. So what we want to do is make sure that in our interactions with your governments, we are constantly emphasizing this issue of good governance because I have confidence that you’ll be able to figure out what changes need to be made in your country.

I’ve always said the destiny of Africa is going to be determined by Africans. It’s not going to be determined by me. It’s not going to be determined by people outside of the continent. It’s going to be determined by you. All we can do is make sure that your voices are heard and you’re able to rise up and take hold of these opportunities. If you do that, I think that there are going to be a lot of people who -- even if they're educated abroad -- want to come home to make their mark.

All right. Let’s see, I’m going to call on this young lady right here.

Q (Speaks in Portuguese and is translated.) Good afternoon, everyone. And thank you, Mr. President, for this opportunity.

THE PRESIDENT: That sounds like Portuguese. (Laughter.)

Q It is, indeed, from Mozambique, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Great.

Q Knowing, Mr. President, that, of course, America is a reference point for democracy in the world, and that you, sir, are, indeed a protagonist in that context today, I would love to hear from you, sir, what you would recommend to the young people in Africa and to civil society, in particular, in terms of following principles of nonviolence and good governance and democratic principles in our country. Because, of course, our reality is very often quite starkly different. There are 80 percent abstentionism often in elections, and elections that, indeed, lack transparency. And all too often lead, alas, to social conflict. Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me say, first of all, that if you are -- just as I said that you can’t separate politics from economics, you can’t separate conflict from development. So the constant conflict, often ethnically-based conflict, that has taken place in Africa is a profound detriment to development and it’s self-reinforcing.

If you have conflict and violence, that scares off investors. That makes it more difficult for business people to create opportunities, which means that young people then don't have work, which means that they are more prone to be recruited in violent conflicts. And you can get a vicious cycle.

So I am a profound believer in not looking at violence as a solution to problems. And I think the moral and ethical power that comes with nonviolence when properly mobilized is profound.

Number two, I think the most important thing that maybe young people here can do is to promote the values of openness, transparency, honest debate, civil disagreements within your own groups and your own organizations, because that forms good habits. If you are part of an organization -- and I’m going to speak to the men here, in particular -- if you are part of an organization where you profess democracy but women don't have an equal voice in your organization, then you're a hypocrite, right? And that is something that -- (applause.) And that is something that we have to be honest about. Oftentimes, women are not getting the same voice in African countries, despite the fact that they are carrying more than their fair share of burdens.

So within your own organizations, within your own networks, modeling good democratic practices, listening to people who you disagree with respectfully, making sure that everybody gets a seat at the table -- all those things I think are very important.

Because part of what I’m going to -- what I’m hoping for is that some of you will end up being leaders of your country some day. And if you think about it, back in the 1960s, when all these -- your grandparents, great-grandparents were obtaining independence, fighting for independence, the first leaders, they all said they were for democracy. And then what ends up happening is you’ve been in power for a while and you say, well, I must be such a good ruler that it is for the benefit of the people that I need to stay here. And so then you start changing the laws, or you start intimidating and jailing opponents. And pretty soon, young people just like yourself -- full of hope and promise -- end up becoming exactly what they fought against.

So one of the things that I think everybody here has to really internalize is the notion that -- I think it was Gandhi who once said you have to be the change that you seek. You have to be the change that you seek. And one of the wonderful things about the United States is that in my position as President there oftentimes where I get frustrated, I think I know more than some of my critics. And yet, we have institutionalized the notion that those critics have every right to criticize me, no matter how unreasonable I think they may be. And I have to stand before the people for an election, and I’m limited to two terms -- it doesn’t matter how good a job I do. And that’s good, because what that means is that we’ve got to -- we’ve instituted a culture where the institutions of democracy are more important than any one individual.

And, now, it’s not as if we’re perfect. Obviously, we’ve got all kinds of problems as well. But what it does mean is that the peaceful transfer of power and the notion that people always have a voice -- our trust in that democratic process is one that has to be embraced in all your countries as well.

Okay? All right, it’s a gentleman’s turn. Let me try to get this side of the table here. This gentleman right here. I’m not going to get everybody, so I apologize in advance.

Q Thank you very much, Mr. President. I'm from Malawi. Mr. President, HIV/AIDS is greatly affecting development in Africa. And if this continues, I’m afraid I think Africa has no future. And I think the young people like us must bring change. And we really need a strong HIV prevention program. But, again, access to treatment must be there.

I attended the recent World AIDS Conference in Vienna, and the critics were saying that the worst -- the U.S. government is not supporting enough HIV/AIDS work in Africa through the PEPFAR and the Global Fund. But, again, on the other side, other HIV/AIDS activists are saying that Africa on its own has not mobilized enough resources to fight the HIV/AIDS pandemic and they are largely depending on the West.

I think the challenge for us as African young leaders is to make sure that this comes to an end and we really need to reduce the transmission. I don’t know -- from your perspective, what can we do to make sure that this comes to a stop? Otherwise, it’s greatly affecting development in Africa.

THE PRESIDENT: Good. Well, let me start by just talking about the United States and what we’re doing. I had some disagreements with my predecessor, but one of the outstanding things that President Bush did was to initiate the PEPFAR program. It’s a huge investment in battling HIV/AIDS both with respect to prevention and also with respect to treatment. Billions of dollars were committed. We have built off of that.

So when you hear critics -- what the critics are saying is that although I’ve increased the funding of the PEPFAR program, they would like to see it increased even more, which I’m sympathetic to, given the fact that the need is so great. But understand I’ve increased it; I haven’t decreased it -- at a time when the United States is suffering from the worst economic -- just coming out of the worst economic recession that we’ve seen since the 1930s. Nevertheless, because of our commitment to this issue, we’ve actually increased funding.

Now, we have couched it in a broader initiative we call the Global Health Initiative. Because even as we’re battling HIV/AIDS, we want to make sure that we are thinking not only in terms of treatment, but also in terms of prevention and preventing transmission.

We’re never going to have enough money to simply treat people who are constantly getting infected. We’ve got to have a mechanism to stop the transmission rate. And so one of the things we’re trying to do is to build greater public health infrastructure, find what prevention programs are working, how can we institutionalize them, make them culturally specific -- because not every program is going to be appropriate for every country.

I will say that in Africa, in particular, one thing we do know is that empowering women is going to be critical to reducing the transmission rate. We do know that. Because so often women, not having any control over sexual practices and their own body, end up having extremely high transmission rates.

So the bottom line is we’re going to focus on prevention, building a public health infrastructure. We’re still going to be funding, at very high levels, antiviral drugs. But keep in mind, we will never have enough money -- it will be endless, an endless effort if the transmission rates stay high and we’re just trying to treat people after their sick.

It’s the classic story of a group of people come upon all these bodies in a stream. And everybody jumps in and starts pulling bodies out, but one wise person goes downstream to see what’s exactly happening that's causing all these people to drown or fall in the water. And that's I think what we have to do, is go downstream to see how can we reduce these transmission rates overall.

And obviously -- when I visited Kenya, for example -- just in terms of education -- Michelle and I, we both got tested near the village where my father was born. We got publicly tested so that we would know what our status was. That was just one example of the kinds of educational mechanisms that we can use that hopefully can make some difference.

All right? Okay, it’s a woman’s turn. Okay, this one right here.

Q Thank you, very much, Mr. President. And greetings from Ghana. We are looking forward fervently to 2014 -- (laughter) -- for a repeat. And I recollect that I was hosting a radio program the day of the match. And we have a football pundit in Ghana -- he doesn’t speak English quite well, but very passionate. And so I was interviewing him about what the psyche of our boys should be ahead of the match. And he said to me, “This is not war, it is football. If it were to be war, then maybe we should be afraid because the might of America is more than us.” (Laughter.) This is football. They should go out there and be the best that they could be. And they did.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, they did an excellent job. They were a great team.

Q Mr. President, my question now is that I hear a lot of young African leaders wonder how committed America would be to a partnership. I hear those who are cynical about the notion of partnership. They ask -- and always they ask, partnership? What kind of fair partnership can exist between a strong and a weak nation?

And so as we prepare ourselves for the future, we ask the same question of America: How committed is your country to ensuring that the difficult decisions that young people have to make about trade, about agriculture, about support, are made -- to the extent that they may not be in the interest of America? Because they tell me also that America will protect its interest over and above all else. Is America committed to ensuring a partnership that might not necessarily be beneficial to America, but truly beneficial to the sovereign interest of the countries that we represent?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me say this. All countries look out for their interests. So -- and I’m the President of the United States, so my job is to look out for the people of the United States. That's my job, right? (Applause.)

Now, I actually think, though, that the interests of the United States and the interests of the continent of Africa greatly overlap. We have a huge interest in seeing development throughout Africa -- because we are a more mature economy, Africa is a young and growing economy, and if you can buy more iPods and buy more products and buy more services and buy more tractors from us, that we can sell to a fast-growing continent, that creates jobs here in the United States of America.

We have a huge interest in your public health systems because if we’re reducing greatly HIV/AIDS transmissions in Africa, then that will have a positive effect on HIV rates internationally, because of the transmigration of diseases back and forth in an international world. And not to mention, if I’m not spending all this money on PEPFAR, that's money I can spend somewhere else. So I’m going to be incentivized to see Africa do well. That's in our interest.

And the truth of the matter is, is that whereas with some regions of the world, we do have some genuine conflicts of interest -- let’s say on trade, for example -- the truth is that the United States, we don't have huge conflicts when it comes to trade because, frankly, the trade between the United States and Africa is so small, so modest, that very few U.S. companies, U.S. commercial interests are impacted.

That's why AGOA, our trade arrangement with Africa -- we can eliminate tariffs and subsidies and allow all sorts of goods to come in partly because you are not our primary competition.

Now, I don't want to pretend that there aren’t ever going to be conflicts. There will be. There’s going to be difference in world views. There are going to be some agricultural products where there are certain interests in the United States or there are certain interests in Europe that want to prevent those from coming in, even though, in the aggregate, it would not have a huge impact on the U.S. economy. And so there are going to be occasional areas of tension. But overall, the reason you should have confidence that we want a partnership is because your success will enhance our position rather than reduce it.

Also Africa has some of our most loyal friends. Every survey that's taken, when you ask what continent generally has the most positive views about America, it turns out Africa generally has a positive view of America and positive experiences. So I think that you should feel confident even if I’m not President that the American people genuinely want to see Africa succeed.

What the American people don't want is to feel like their efforts at helping are wasted. So if at a time of great constraint, we are coming up with aid, those aid dollars need to go to countries that are actually using them effectively. And if they're not using them effectively, then they should go to countries that are.

And one of the things that I’ve said to my development team is I want us to have high standards in terms of performance and evaluation when we have these partnerships -- because a partnership is a two-way street. It means that, on the one hand, we’re accountable to you and that we have to listen to you and make sure that any plans that we have, have developed indigenously. On the other hand, it also means you’re accountable. So you can’t just say, give me this, give me that, and then if it turns out that it’s not working well, that's not your problem. Right? It has to be a two-way street.

Okay, looks like this side has not gotten a question here. So how about this gentleman right here.

Q Thank you, Mr. President -- I'm from Zimbabwe. Currently our government is in a transition between the former ruling party Zanu PF and the Movement for Democratic Change. And within this same context, Zimbabwe is currently under restrictive measures, especially for those who are party in line with Robert Mugabe under the ZIDERA Act. How has been the success of ZIDERA -- the formation of the inclusive government? Because in Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe is still using the rhetoric of sanctions, racist, property rights abuse, human rights abuse, in violation to the rule of law. How has been the success of that towards the implementation -- the success or the growth of young people?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, you probably have a better answer than me. So you should be sharing with our team what you think would make the most sense. I’ll be honest with you -- I’m heartbroken when I see what’s happened in Zimbabwe. I think Mugabe is an example of a leader who came in as a liberation fighter and -- I’m just going to be very blunt -- I do not see him serving his people well. And the abuses, the human rights abuses, the violence that's been perpetrated against opposition leaders I think is terrible.

Now, Changerai has tried to work -- despite the fact that he himself has been beaten and imprisoned, he has now tried to work to see if there is a gradual transition that might take place. But so far, the results have not been what we had hoped.

And this always poses a difficult question for U.S. foreign policy because, on the one hand, we don't want to punish the people for the abuses of a leader; on the other hand, we have very little leverage other than saying, if there are just systematic abuses by a government, we are not going to deal with them commercially, we’re not going to deal with them politically, in ways that we would with countries that are observing basic human rights principles.

And so there have been discussions when I’ve traveled with leaders in the Southern African region about whether or not sanctions against Zimbabwe are or are not counterproductive. I will tell you I would love nothing more than to be able to open up greater diplomatic relationships and economic and commercial relationships with Zimbabwe. But in order to do so, we’ve got to see some signal that it will not simply entrench the same past abuses but rather will move us in a new direction that actually helps the people.

And Zimbabwe is a classic example of a country that should be the breadbasket for an entire region. It’s a spectacular country. Now, it had to undergo a transition from white minority rule that was very painful and very difficult. But they have chosen a path that's different than the path that South Africa chose.

South Africa has its problems, but from what everybody could see during the World Cup, the potential for moving that country forward as a multiracial, African democracy that can succeed on the world stage, that's a model that so far at least Zimbabwe has not followed. And that's where I’d like to see it go. All right?

How much more time do I have, guys? Last question? I’m sorry -- last question. Last question. No, it’s a young lady’s turn. This one right here.

Q Good afternoon, Mr. President, your excellencies. I am from Somalia. I came all the way here with one question, and that is, living in conflict in a country that has confused the whole world, and being part of the diaspora that went back to risk our lives in order to make Somalia a better place, especially with what we’re going through right now -- how much support do we expect from the U.S.? And not support just in terms of financially or aid, but support as an ear, as a friend, as somebody who hears and listens to those of us who are putting our lives and our families at risk to defend humanity.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think you will have enormous support from the people of the United States when it comes to trying to create a structure and framework in Somalia that works for the Somali people.

Now, the history of Somalia over the last 20 years has been equally heartbreaking, if not more so. You have not had a effective, functioning government that can provide basic services. It’s been rife with conflict. And now the entire region is threatened because of radical extremists who have taken root in Somalia, taking advantage of what they perceive to be a failing state, to use that as a base to launch attacks, most recently in Uganda.

And obviously the United States expresses its deepest condolences to the lives that were lost in Kampala -- at the very moment of the World Cup. And it offered two contrasting visions. You have this wonderful, joyous celebration in South Africa at the same time as you have a terrorist explosion in Kampala.

So we desperately want Somalia to succeed. And this is another example of where our interests intersect. If you have extremist organizations taking root in Somalia, ultimately that can threaten the United States as well as Uganda, as well as Kenya, as well as the entire region.

So right now you’ve got a transitional government that is making some efforts. I don’t think anybody expects Somalia anytime in the next few years to suddenly be transformed into a model democracy. Whatever governance structures take place in Somalia have to be aware of the tribal and traditional structures and clan structures that exist within Somalia. But certainly what we can do is create a situation where people -- young people are not carrying around rifles, shooting each other on the streets. And we want to be a partner with Somalia in that effort, and we will continue to do so.

And some of it is financial, some of it is developmental, some of it is being able to help basic infrastructure. In some cases, we may try to find a portion of the country that is relatively stable and start work there to create a model that the rest of the country can then look at and say, this is a different path than the one that we’re taking right now.

But in the end, I think that this metaphor of the success of the World Cup and the bombing shows that each of you are going to be confronted with two paths. There’s going to be a path that takes us into a direction of more conflict, more bloodshed, less economic development, continued poverty even as the rest of the world races ahead -- or there’s a vision in which people come together for the betterment and development of their own country.

And for all the great promise that’s been fulfilled over the last 50 years, I want you to understand -- because I think it’s important for us to be honest with ourselves -- Africa has also missed huge opportunities for too long. And I’ll just give you one example.

When my father traveled to the United States and got his degree in the early ’60s, the GDP of Kenya was actually on partner, maybe actually higher than the GDP of South Korea. Think about that. All right? So when I was born, Kenya per capita might have been wealthier than South Korea. Now it’s not even close. Well, that’s 50 years that was lost in terms of opportunities. When it comes to natural resources, when it comes to the talent and potential of the people, there’s no reason why Kenya shouldn’t have been on that same trajectory.

And so 50 years from now, when you look back you want to make sure that the continent hasn’t missed those opportunities as well. We want to make sure of that as well. And the United States wants to listen to you and work with you. And so when you go back and you talk to your friends and you say, what was the main message the President had -- we are rooting for your success, and we want to work with you to achieve that success, but ultimately success is going to be in your hands. And being a partner means that we can be there by your side, but we can’t do it for you.

Okay, thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. (Applause.)

END 3:03 P.M. EDT

Sources
http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/town-hall-with-young-african-leaders

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-town-hall-with-young-african-leaders

MULTIDIMENSIONAL POVERTY INDEX

What is the MPI?

The lives of people living in poverty are affected by more than just their income. The Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) complements a traditional focus on income to reflect the deprivations that a poor person faces all at once with respect to education, health and living standard. It assesses poverty at the individual level, with poor persons being those who are multiply deprived, and the extent of their poverty being measured by the range of their deprivations.

The MPI can be used to create a vivid picture of people living in poverty, both across countries, regions and the world and within countries by ethnic group, urban/rural location, or other key household characteristics. It is the first international measure of its kind, and offers an essential complement to income poverty measures because it measures deprivations directly. The MPI can be used as an analytical tool to identify the most vulnerable people, show aspects in which they are deprived and help to reveal the interconnections among deprivations. This enables policy makers to target resources and design policies more effectively. Other dimensions of interest, such as work, safety, and empowerment, could be incorporated into the MPI in the future as data become available.

The MPI reports acute poverty for 104 developing countries, which are home to 78% of the world’s people.

What does the MPI measure?

The MPI uses 10 indicators to measure three critical dimensions of poverty at the household level: education, health and living standard in 104 developing countries. These directly measured deprivations in health and educational outcomes as well as key services such as water, sanitation, and electricity reveal not only how many people are poor but also the composition of their poverty. The MPI also reflects the intensity of poverty – the sum of weighted deprivations that each household faces at the same time. A person who is deprived in 70% of the indicators is clearly worse off than someone who is deprived in 40% of the indicators.

Why is the MPI useful?

The MPI is a high resolution lens on poverty – it shows the nature of poverty better than income alone. Knowing not just who is poor but how they are poor is essential for effective human development programs and policies. This straightforward yet rigorous index allows governments and other policymakers to understand the various sources of poverty for a region, population group, or nation and target their human development plans accordingly. The index can also be used to show shifts in the composition of poverty over time so that progress, or the lack of it, can be monitored.

The MPI goes beyond previous international measures of poverty to:

• Show all the deprivations that impact someone’s life at the same time – so it can inform a holistic response.

• Identify the poorest people. Such information is vital to target people living in poverty so they benefit from key interventions.

• Show which deprivations are most common in different regions and among different groups, so that resources can be allocated and policies designed to address their particular needs.

• Reflect the results of effective policy interventions quickly. Because the MPI measures outcomes directly, it will immediately reflect changes such as school enrolment, whereas it can take time for this to affect income.

• Integrate many different aspects of poverty related to the MDGs into a single measure, reflecting interconnections among deprivations and helping to identify poverty traps.

Who can use the MPI?

• Governments

• Non-Governmental Organisations

• Private Sector institutions

• Civil Society groups and Advocacy groups

How was the MPI created?

The MPI was created using a technique developed by Sabina Alkire and James Foster. The Alkire Foster method measures outcomes at the individual level (person or household) against multiple criteria (dimensions and indicators). The method is flexible and can be used with different dimensions and indicators to create measures specific to different societies and situations. For example, it can be applied to measure poverty or wellbeing, target services or conditional cash transfers and for monitoring and evaluation of programmes. The method can show the incidence, intensity and depth of poverty, as well as inequality among the poor, depending on the type of data available to create the measure. Read our policy page for more information on the method and the countries that have adopted it.

The specific indicators, cutoffs and weights the MPI employs were chosen in a long process of consultation, study, and fieldwork, and are the best combination possible to compare 104 countries, using indicators that resonate with the Millennium Development Goals.

MORE:
http://www.ophi.org.uk/policy/multidimensional-poverty-index/

Alkire, Sabina and Maria Emma Santos. 2010. Multidimensional Poverty Index: 2010 Data. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. Available at: www.ophi.org.uk/policy/multidimensional-poverty-index/.

THE TEN POOREST COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD RESIDE IN AFRICA-HOW TO CHANGE THE STATUS QUO

Sub-Saharan Africa is the poorest region in the world, followed by South Asia, according to a new measure developed by Oxford University, with support from the U.N.
The measure, called the Multidimensional Poverty Index, or MPI, will replace the Human Poverty Index in the United Nations' upcoming Human Development Report, due out this October.

...

A household is counted as "multidimensionally poor" if it is deprived of over 30 percent of the ten indicators used by the MPI. Researchers have calculated the percentage of people in each country who are poor, and of the 25 poorest countries, 24 are located in Africa.

The countries below are, according to the MPI, the 10 poorest countries in the world:

Niger

Ethiopia

Mali

Burkina Faso

Burundi

Somalia

Central African Republic

Liberia

Guinea

Sierra Leone

MORE

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/03/the-10-poorest-countries_n_668537.html#s122149