Congoboston, in its mission to empower our people, living in the US and to help them network through local community media, is interviewing Professor Justin M. Kankwenda of the UNDP, United Nations Development Programme. He is Deputy to the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the Great Lakes. He is author of the book, which he will introduce some headlines to you, our readers.


First Part


CongoBoston (Franklin Katunda): Tell us about yourself and family, professor… Tell us about your educational and professional background?

Prof. Kankwenda: Thank you, Mr Franklin Katunda for giving me the opportunity to “talk” to CongoBoston members and readers. I feel deeply honored by the offer. Talking about my educational background, I got my first degree in Economics in Kinshasa, at Lovanium University, and went then to prepare my Master Degree in Economic Development and Planning at the African Institute for Economic Development and Planning (IDEP) in Dakar, Senegal. Later on, I prepared my PhD in Economics at the University of Grenoble II, France, but defended my PhD thesis in Kinshasa at the then National University of Zaïre in 1980. My PhD thesis was on Industrialization and Development regionalization in Zaïre”. I taught at the University of Kinshasa and the National School of Journalism (ISTI).

Professionally, I became Managing Director of the National Institute of Scientific Research (IRS), Senior Economic Adviser to the Congolese Minister of Planning, Minister of State for National Economy and Industry, before joining the United Nations where I was entrusted with, among other functions, UNDP Africa Chief Economist, Chief for the Regional Programme and Policy Analysis Division at HQs in New York. I moved up to becoming the UN Resident Coordinator and UNDP Resident Representative in some African countries, Coordinator for the UNDP Programme on Peace Building and Development Initiatives in the Great Lakes Region, and I’m Deputy to the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the Great Lakes. I’m married and father ten children.

CongoBoston: Wow, very impressive… How did you get in the United Nations’ world?

Prof. Kankwenda: While working with the Congolese Ministry of Planning, I was in charge of UNDP cooperation Programme. I also worked as UNDP consultant. From these interaction and exposure, UNDP identified me and suggested my name to HQs when there was a vacancy for UNDP Senior Field Economist. I went through the whole recruitment process: short listing, interview panels in New York, etc. And was finally recruited as Senior Economist for Niger Republic, which was my first duty station. That’s the way I got to work with the United Nations.


CongoBoston: I have good news from people about your recent book. Can tell us about, what makes it interesting?


Prof. Kankwenda: The book is an analysis of the institutionalization of the predatory practices as a governance system in DR Congo. What implies an analysis of (i) the nature of the political regimes that have been and are still looting DRC resources; (ii) the political and coercive machinery that has been put in place and its operating modalities; (iii) the economic and financial predation instruments and mechanisms; (iv) the alliances with external forces within the International Predation System (IPS); (v) the role of Congolese elites; (vi) the instrumentalization of the ethno-politics; (vii) the lack of or the poor place that is given to people, and the country’s development in the political regimes' agenda and power's equation; (viii) the political, economic, social and cultural consequences on the present and the future of the country as well; (ix) and a call for an alternative strategy for the future. The book has a historical perspective; it calls out to all of us: historians, political scientists, sociologists, development specialists, economists, philosophers, natural sciences specialists, engineers, applied sciences specialists, futurist sciences specialists, political activists and players, writers, etc. As you know the predatory economy as a politically institutionalized system, what I call “Predatocracy”, was there yesterday, it is there today, it fights to remain there for tomorrow. The book is then about what Congolese experience on a daily basis. In addition, it launches new analytical concepts: predatocracy, development socialization, development leadership, international predatory system, etc. Everybody feels concerned by the book, including development partners and Congo friends. I think that the topic at the center stage of the book, the analysis and the methodological approach, all these features explain the good news you have heard about my last book, “The Political Economy of Predation in DRC: from origins to now (1885-2003)”.


CongoBoston: People would want to know which edition publishes it; the book’s price and where they can buy it?

Prof. Kankwenda: The book”L’Économie politique de la prédation au Congo-Kinshasa, des origines à nos jours: 1885-2003” was published by “Les Editions: ICREDES”(Kinshasa-Montréal-Washington, 2005) The price is US $ 35.00. Anybody interested can buy it from the ICREDES office or representations in Canada, in the DR Congo, and in Rockville, MD USA. We have established some selling points in Atlanta, Boston, NewYork, Brussels and Paris.Those from the New England who wish to buy the book, may contact Prof. Jean Pierre Mulumba. Let me add, Franklin, that the publishing entity, ICREDES stands for “Institut Congolais de Recherche en Développement et Etudes Strategiques” (Congolese Institute for Development Research and Strategic Studies); which I’ve founded in 2004 and I am currently managing.

CongoBoston: During one of your interview, you quoted: Patrice Lumumba who said: “The Congo will write its own history, which will not be the one written or taught in Brussels, in Paris, London nor Washington DC”, and he was right, you concluded (see article with Culturek, 08-05-2005). Can you give us your brief critique about the Belgian book author, such as Colette Braekman about the DR Congo?


Prof. Kankwenda: The article being referred to is a cross reading of Ms Colette Braekman’s book entitled: “Les Nouveaux Prédateurs” or the New Predators. As demonstrated in the said article, the book is indeed a fabric or tissue of eclecticisms, inconsistencies, factual inaccuracies, revealing omissions and silences, but many assertions rather than demonstrations, the whole in the service of a served thesis. Ms. Braekaman book principal thesis is this one: “the kabilism, under Kabila I and II is a nationalist project, patriotic, carrying economic and social progress for Congolese and the country. The new predators who are the United States, the United Kingdom, France, their multinational companies and their mercenaries Rwanda and Uganda taken among “area boys” fight it. Congolese must understand the direction of the current fights from these new predators, and to support the “kabilism” because it is in their interest”.

Ms. Braekman’s book excludes Belgium as a member of the new predators It is a tissue of inconsistencies, assertions without demonstration, eclecticisms and factual inaccuracies, omissions and silences on political terrorism, and the actual nature of the kabilist predatocracy, all these put together in a book cannot demonstrate nor prove such a thesis. In order to have a good picture and knowledge of the nature, the practices and the operating mode of the so-called new predators, it is necessary to carry out a thorough analysis, to clarify the same parameters for the old predators, to see what are the continuity and the linkage between the two predator categories (old and so-called new ones) if they are really different. Is it really a matter of new predators, or rather of new mechanisms and new opportunities for predation? Because the USA, Great Britain, France and their multinational companies have always been actors, participating in the predation of Congo natural resources. The UN report on the illegal exploitation of DR Congo natural resources has demonstrated how Congolese leaders currently in power have been looting our resources. Ms. Braekman is silent on that.

In this article, I announced my recent published book. In the chapter devoted to the International Predatory System (IPS), there is a paragraph that reads: "In the same way, it is necessary to also mention a special actors group in the IPS. It is composed of all international "griots" or praising singers, paid to sing and sell the image of the predatocratic regimes: those are in particular the pro-Mobutu or pro-Kabila lobbying groups in Europe and America, foreigner medias, publishers, book writers/authors to the glory of the chiefs of the predatocratic regimes, some renowned lawyers, influential professors, communication adviser companies, organizers of dinners and special meetings, organizers of supporters and fan clubs, whatever the name they carry. I am always suspicious of foreign "specialists" when they allow themselves to become Congolese “patriots” as in this case, and to give lessons or to undertake mobilization campaigns in favor of the regime in power”.

CongoBoston: Can you tell us about the concept “Kabilism” in the DR Congo if you would?

Prof. Kankwenda: The kabilism is a predatocracy i.e. an institutionalized predatory system of governance, militarizing the political arena, privatizing the public coercion means and resources, based on ethno-politics, externally propelled and sponsored by the IPS, and terrorizing its own people. It is like the Mobutism. But it is different from the Mobutism on two things: it is made of many politico-militarist adventurers without managerial experience and capacity. Secondly knowing that it may not get the electoral legitimacy of their gun-based power in order to keep it, its primary struggle is to get its political laundering through the forthcoming elections, and loot Congo resources as much as it can.

CongoBoston: Can you give us your opinion about the political process in the Congo, as far as the constitutional referendum, the June 2006 general elections, and the decision from the Independent Commission for Elections (CEI) to deny voting rights to Congolese from the world’s Diaspora?

Prof. Kankwenda: I appreciate you asking that question…. Let me clarify one important thing at this stage of our conversation. There are four power instruments: the gun or weapon force, the financial power, the backing of external forces and the popular loyalty. The DR Congo’s political process is led by the legitimacy of guns and weapons, the so-called 1+4 coalition. Such a coalition doesn’t accept to fully play the legitimacy of popular loyalty, the ballot box legitimacy. The whole process, trying to legitimate the gun/finance/external power legitimacy is a political confiscation of the democratization process in DR Congo by the 1+4 coalition, heavily supported by a number of its external “godfathers”. It may lead to another “aristocratic democracy” denying genuine rights and aspirations of the Congolese people. Just look at the way the whole electoral process has been staged: the instrumentalization of the so-called CEI, the Independent Electoral Commission, the registration process, the census of voters and the figures by province, etc. It is a sort of game where rules as set up by the reigning coalition and the ICAT in their interests, which already indicate who they want to see winning. I say that not listening to genuine aspirations of the Congolese people is criminal, and may push the populations and excluded democratic political and social forces to violent reactions. The Togolese or the “Mainassara” (Niger) scenarios may not succeed in DR Congo as planned by some external intelligence services and political powers.

As far as the constitutional referendum is concerned, everybody knew that the “sabotage” and the “No” were going to take over the ballot. But everybody also knew that the “Yes” was going to be declared as wining! As you know, there were several versions of the constitution, which one won at the referendum, since even those said to be the majority who voted it do not know it. Moreover, everybody, including those who prepared the 1+4 coalition-tailored constitution knows that it will be revised. It is a sort of transitional constitution again. Nobody believes in the final results, even not the ICAT and its influential members.

Another dimension of your question is about the forthcoming elections. I think that what the Congolese Congress in America – CCA – has put in “The Washington Manifesto on DRC: the Congo crisis exit Plan”, and in its “Memorandum on Great Lakes Region: opportunities and Challenges” is really true. The current tendency to organize a non-inclusive electoral process on the ground of different technical pretexts is part of the staging machinery of the elections to make sure that it leads to pre-cooked results. Unless it is accepted to have true DFF elections (meaning democratic, free and fair elections), all-inclusive for political forces that are being excluded, we may have to experience another predatocracy under microwaved or modified gun legitimacy. I’d recommend that Congolese fellows read the two documents I referred to.

About the decision from the Independent Electoral Commission (CEI) to not allow Congolese in Diaspora to vote, I think that as instrumentalized by the reigning coalition and its backers as it is now, the Commission has just applied what it was asked to do. It is no longer a citizen institution, but rather a government/ICAT-executing agency. There are today close to three millions Congolese living out of the country. Elected president, senators, representatives, governors, etc are their leaders called to govern their country. Why should they be excluded whatever the pretext is in terms of logistical machinery? Is it so difficult for the IEC in collaboration with our embassies to establish voter lists, appoint members of the voter offices and organize elections? I don’t think so. It is a political matter and the reigning coalition that is fully aware that the majority of the Congolese Diaspora has negative political opinions towards the transition institutions: their failure and their bad performance, didn’t want the Diaspora to participate in the process.
 

Click here to read the next part of this interview.

© Congoboston.com January, 2006