The article published on Globu ya Jamii written by Mr. John Mashaka titled ‘Economic Colonialism, Food Piracy, Land Grabbing and Future Conflicts’ was profoundly polarizing and sentimental.
My synoptical comprehension of the said article is that Tanzania and African governments are seriously misguided in executing policies that allow foreigners access to African farmland. It was also argued in the said article that the trend ought to be contained by marginalizing foreigners from usage of African farmland. I also read about 20 subsequent responses from fellow bloggers and there seem to be a clear pattern in support of this school of thought.
I am writing first to express my appreciation to Mr. Mashaka’s for tackling such a complex and sensitive issue in a manner that evidently persuaded many readers. However, I would like to present an alternative thought and position on this matter.
The policy of the incumbent Government to invite foreigners to participate in a wide spectrum of economic sectors including agriculture is fundamentally appropriate and commendable.
Tanzania has about 44 million hectares of land of which about 11 million hectares is in use. I was dismayed by arguments suggesting that the land will not expire so foreigners need to keep their hands off the farmlands.
There are several reasons why I do not share the position of kicking foreigners out of Tanzanian farmland and here are a few (10):
* Kicking out foreigners is not practical because should foreigners feel the need to actually have a stake in Tanzanian land they can always use proxies. Such policies are overly simplistic and theoretical, they are virtually impractical.
* If a Tanzanian businessman enters into a joint venture agreement with a foreigner it would be unconstitutional unless there is an official trade embargo to prevent him or her from exercising the fundamental right to choose a business partner in this world of free enterprise. This can only be feasible in a Socialist State which is a key ingredient for an economic stagnation and backwardness.
* The terms of land usage and terms of distribution of output bear more significance on the population than whether the land is leased to a national or foreigner. If a citizen with limited investment resources can only produce $100 worth of output primarily to feed his immediate family but a foreign commercial farmer is capable of producing output to the tune of $1000 on the same piece of land on terms of 50/50 split, are we better off as a nation to continue subsistence farming by citizens or commercial farming by foreigners?
* Many Arab countries today are wealthy not simply because they have oil but also because they have been able to use their oil to attract investments and technology and to translate oil revenues into national development and prosperity. In turn, all stakeholders including oil companies have ripped billions of dollars and so have the Arab nations. If Arabs had this mentality of viewing foreigners as vultures who simply want to extort their natural resources , these countries would simply not have developed. They would still be living nomadic Bedouin lives in the vast deserts under which there are massive oil reserves.
* Arguments that foreigners are in Tanzania as a resort to their land challenges back home and so they must not benefit from our resources does not bear economic basis. In today’s world of commerce and global economies, countries must identify needs of others and capitalize on those needs profitably instead of abhorring needs.
* When citizens do not have adequate farmland in an economic environment where most people earn a living on land that can certainly be catastrophic. This social, political and economic risk can be averted by scientific approach and not by simply kicking out foreigners. The Government can study demographic trends to assess the demand for land by citizens in years to come and use the findings of the study to determine how much land can be allocated to foreigners and for what time span.
* Our Tanzanite did not have strong value until Tiffany promoted the gem in the United States. Our agricultural outputs can command better prices in the international market if we have stronger partners on the supply side, these foreign farmers are our economic partners because they also need to market in international markets to be sustainable.
* With the current global arrangements, we typically benefit from commercial agriculture after our farmers have toiled in the fields and after being able to sell output to commodity markets at prices decided by international buyers sometimes in the neighborhood of cost. This new business model of inviting foreigners to engage in agriculture that the Government is pursuing gives us an unprecedented opportunity to start cashing in on our resources upfront at the time of contract execution before we have any yield from the land. Agricultural economists can provide a fair projection of projected output from land and the Government can assess lease fee based on these projections. Such methodologies would contribute more revenues to the Government as opposed to the this idea of kicking foreigners out of the country in the name of protecting peasantry when we already have plenty of virgin land for peasants.
* In 2010, The Europen Union spent over 39 Billion Euros on Farming Subsidies, the United States spends about $20 billion annually. This is a huge challenge and hindrance to farmers in developing countries. The decision by the Tanzanian Government to allow foreigners to lease lands accords the country an incredible
negotiating leverage; Tanzania can demand that countries interested in investing in Tanzania address these subsidies on terms acceptable to both Tanzania and interested countries.
* Several countries like the United States have laws that demand prosecution of citizens if they are implicated of engaging in briberies oversees. By allowing these kind of foreigners to invest in the country it avails us extra momentum to in the fight against corruption and it is a step forward towards fostering a transparent business environment.
A classic example of recent relations of mutual benefit is the recent agreement between the Government and South Korean Investors who will be pumping in $50 million to agricultural projects in the Rufiji Basin on 100,000 hectares of unused arable land that has been sitting idle while Tanzanians are hungry. About half of the said land will be used for Tanzanians who will be trained on modern methods of farming while the remaining half will be used by South Koreans for agro based industries. This is clearly a win-win negotiation and the Government must be commended for this development.
Tanzanians must learn to engage in intellectual battles and negotiations with the right attitude towards foreigners in order to capitalize on the synergies of international commerce. Hoarding national resources is not the answer. Nationalistic ideals have their place but if they are going to be propagated indiscriminately it will only be detrimental to economic prosperity.
Your article could have been much better if you had provided more evidence and used less of "fear or scaremongering". I respect your opinions but until you come back with concrete examples, I find no reason to answer someone who's intentions are clear. Thank you.
ReplyDeletehuyu jamaa anayemjibu mashaka hajafika hata nusu ya uwezo wa msahaka. flow yake ni low quality kusema kweli. mashaka nikimsoma ni mwanzo hadi mwisho material inaflow kichwani, lakini afadhali umejaribu.
ReplyDeletek
pili hongera sana, hii ndo njia pekee ya kukwaa umaarufu kwenye hii blog. hata ukiandika upupu, kumpinga mashaka kunatosha kabisa
wewe hassan, mimi nakuunga mkono kwa kiasi kikubwa lakini sio kwa silimia mia moja. Kwanza kabisa sijui wewe ni mtanzania mwenzetu au ndio nyie mnaotaka kuvamia tanzania kwa kisingizio cha uwekezaji. Na kama ni mtanzania mwenzetu ningekushauri utuandikie article zako kwa kiswahili. Najua unajua kiingereza cha kuandika pengine hata cha kuongea lakini watanzania wengi hawakijui na sio lazima wakijue kama hawana mipango ya kimataifa. Swala la ardhi ni swala nyeti sana hasa kama hatma ya indigenous people haitaangaliwa. Hawa ni watu ambao hawana mitaji ya kuwawezesha kushindana na hao wawekezaji na pia hawana uwezo wa kwenda kuwekeza nchi zingine. Serikali inatakiwa iwe makini sana na maamuzi yanayohusu ardhi kwani kinachotakiwa ni win win situation. Ninavyojua mimi foreign investors wengi wao hawana interest na wazawa. Wanachotaka ni kutumia ujinga wa wazawa kuwanyonya kadiri wawezavyo na wakishaona mambo yameharibika wanakimbia nchi.
ReplyDeletelakini hebu chukua mifano ya Kenya na Zimbabwe halafu upendekeze mfumo ambao ungeona utaleta hiyo win win situation.
I am not supporting anybody but mashaka writings are SUPERB. he has no match since I started to read his article is flawed i just dont want to machete it.
ReplyDeleteUS Blogger)
ReplyDeleteThis is the smartest guy ever. This is genius not like the the Genius wannabe , self proclaimed prophet yohana mashaka. Hassan you are the man
I love interlectual like these. Mashaka is no brainer, he is just a politician wanna be. "Yohanna Mashaka is a cheap politician, Nyerere look alike, trying to brain wash people to warship him so he can rule them. Not in this Tanzania
Yohanna, I am sending you a message. I am ready to pay you 3.5 million dollars so you can come for a debate in Bongo Radio, TBC-1 or ITV so I can show you how smart I am
I am the smartest, and richest celebrity not like you, unabeba boxi kwenye supermarket . I will give you a job, and fly you in my private jet to TZ. dont be scared. hapa lazima uogope Hassan kakupasua na paper ya ukweli
Dr. US Blogger
Alumni,Ofxord University
Economics Department
Hassan. kwa nini lengo lako kubwa ni kubishana na mashaka badala ya kuandika ya maana. Mimi naona mashaka ana uzito sana kwenye mada zake. huo ndio muono wangu. samahani kukukera
ReplyDeleteAlichoandika hassan ni kitu cha kweli. Tunahitaji wawekezaji ili uchumi ukue. Lakini tunahitaji mfumo ambao utasaidia huo uwekezaji uwe na tija kwa wazawa. Sio tu tugawe ardhi halafu baadae watu wetu wanakuwa wakimbizi ndani ya nchi yao. Kenya na Zimbabwe ni mifano mizuri ya uwekezaji mbaya katika ardhi.
ReplyDeleteSi vema kulinganisha mada kwa kuwahukumu waliozitoa. Tena ni mbaya zaidi pale mada hizo zinapokuwa na maslahi kwa taifa letu. Ningependekeza kila anayetaka kuchangia hoja aache kwanza kuangalia ni nani aliyeitoa na badala yake azingatie tu changamoto zinazoibuliwa. Mada zote ni elimu, hivyo tuziheshimu na kuzihukumu kwa haki na usawa, na mwisho wa siku ndio tuamue aidha tupo upande gani wa mada au kuzichanganya kwa uwiano wa uelewa ili tupate kilicho bora zaidi kwa manufaa yetu sote.
ReplyDeleteKumbuka, wewe kijana wa leo unawajibika kwa vizazi vijavyo, maamuzi yako ya leo na kejeli yatawaumiza watoto wa leo na wale wajao kesho. Fikiria vema na kuwa mvumilivu pale watu wanapotoa hoja.
Canada.
US Blogger hujatulia.
ReplyDeleteWell done Hassan, this was food for thought. I lean towards your perspective rather than Mashaka's.
ReplyDeleteIn the fast moving global commerce, we must have smart policies and adapt quick various production/business modals to survive.
I am impressed by both of you (Hassan/Mashaka).
Good job guys.
God Bless Tanzania
Wewe Anonymous wa kwanza (07:48:00 AM) ndugu yangu kweli umesoma article nzima na umeelewa, au unakurupuka tu na kuandika tu.Hassan ametoa Mifano kibao ya nchi zenye utajiri wa mafuta wanavyofaidika na rasilimali zao licha ya kuwa hawana teknolojia lakini wanatumia wawekezaji waliyokuwa na hiyo tekinolojia na capital wote nafaidika. Amezungumzia wakulima wa USA na Ulaya jinsi serikali zao zinavyowalinda kwa kuwapa maruzuku ya mapesa. Sasa ndugu wewe hayo yote huoni, kweli iko kazi!
ReplyDeleteTuacha ufuasi wa kijinga, I like Mashaka, he is a bright man, and we need him for his various thoughts, as well as we need others to contribute with different twists. I like Hassan analysis which in my opinion is practical economically.