Letters

ing Awards should be actually held in Africa and if the sponsors think otherwise then it is high time they thought instead about channelling funds towards more pressing issues such as fighting poverty, tackling the HIV/ Aids pandemic and improving education in Africa. There are many indigenous banks in Africa. Why not celebrate and honour their success in Africa? Is that not what they say is the whole reason for the Bankers Awards? I was also left with the impression that, according to the Banker Awards, there is just one country in Africa with banks – Nigeria. We as readers and followers of African events the world-over have to question the objectivity of the African Banker Awards. In spite of all these negative, I remain convinced that the honouring of Africa’s best in the banking sector is a commendable achievement – keep up the good work. Benias Chinofamba harare, Zimbabwe.

*You have raised some good points, Benias. To respond: The reason why the African Banker Awards were held in Washington DC rather than in an African capital was precisely to prevent the nominees from having to fly around the continent. Our awards were timed to coincide with the annual World Bank meeting in Washington which is regularly attended by African officials and private bankers. We did not have to fly them out – they were already there for the World Bank meeting. Re your point about Nigerian banks. You will know that over the past three years, Nigerian banks have performed remarkably well following the reforms in their industry. The awards were made by an independent panel of judges which contained representatives from several African countries. We had nothing at all to do with the verdicts. Nevertheless, it was good to see that a relatively small bank from Swaziland won an important award. - Editor

A nation decides The US and Africa As the US begins to decide who from the two major parties, Democrats and Republicans, should battle it out in next November’s presidential elections, it is worth taking a look at the candidates in the selection process and the policies they are promising for Africa. There are millions of African-Americans living in the US who hold the continent dear and a substantial number of African-born

Barack Obama responded to the Leon H Sullivan survey of candidates’ policies towards Africa.

immigrants who, whether they are eligible to vote or not, will still be keenly involved in the debate over who should succeed George W Bush in 2009. A recent survey was conducted by a coalition of 15 US-based NGOs led by the Leon H Sullivan Foundation. Those NGOs included The Africa Society of the National Summit on Africa, Amnesty International, the Constituency for Africa and the Save Darfur Coalition. They came up with 10 questions for the presidential hopefuls of both the main political parties – the Democrats and the Republicans. The questions tackled issues such as genocide, debt relief, the environment, and transparency in governance. By the end of last year only four Democratic presidential hopefuls had responded, including Senator Barack Obama and former Senator John Edwards. Senator Hillary Clinton, wife to former-president Bill Clinton, failed to complete the questionnaire. It is often stated that African Americans instinctively support the Democratic candidate and there seems no reason why that should change in the forthcoming polls, especially if Obama is on the ticket and it is telling that no Republican candidate responded to the Leon H Sullivan Foundation’s survey. It is also very relevant that Barack Obama, who did respond to the survey and in some detail, has former assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Susan Rice and National Security Council senior director for Africa, Gayle Smith, to advise him on his Africa policy. For those with a vote and who want the African Renaissance to turn from aspiration

to a reality, I think the lessons to be drawn from these observations are clear. Randolph Perkins Jnr los Angeles, us

Africa – EU Summit The right conclusion? Do you think that Anver Versi’s cover story on the EU-AU Summit in Lisbon is really an adequate analysis? Does it really come to the right conclusion? Are African leaders to be applauded for ‘standing firm’ while the ‘German chancellor and the ‘pro-Gordon Gang’ are ridiculed? African Business has a tradition of generously applauding African leaders, but it is unfortunate that the magazine does not use the freedom of press it enjoys in the UK to stand with the poor, the oppressed and the most vulnerable. Is it not your vocation, indeed your responsibility, to remind readers in the strongest possible terms of the clear link between human rights and long-term economic success? Instead you choose to defend a number of African leaders who speak as if they are still battling colonialism. Millions of refugees and people living in exile deserve a real African voice from beyond the continent! Who will assist Africa’s failed states in their recovery? The Chinese? Let us not fool ourselves. Andreas Peltzer, Windhoek, Namibia

* I fail to see your point. What has reporting, accurately as it turns out, that African leaders took a firm and united stand (which they did) against an EU attempt to package old wine in a new bottle got to do with people living in exile, etc? We would have been the first to criticise them if they had accepted the same terms of trade that even the EU itself acknowledges are partly responsible for Africa’s poverty. We applaud African leaders when they perform their duties well and condemn them when they don’t. We do the same for other world leaders in their relations with Africa. We have always stood with the people but we do not believe in wringing hands or pointing fingers – we believe the people of Africa can succeed and are succeeding. That is what we report on, month after month, in detail, in practically all our stories. We use our freedom of the press to express our views, even if these views stick in the craw of some. - Editor

8 African Business | February 2008