A Peaceful coexistence could only continue to flourish in a nation if there is security and equal justice to all its citizens. Denial of the people’s rights and distortion of justice could lead to inevitable conflict, hatred and animosity. I believe, it’s high time for us Guineans to engage ourselves as equal partners in forging a New Guinea that secures our identity and equality of rights. This paper invites the youths and all patriotic Guineans to come forth and search for our common humanity to reconcile our bitterness towards one another. It asserts that factors of our moral potentials could serve as common ground for reconciliation and peace building among our people.

The Sources of a Great Lesson for Peace Building

In search of our common humanity, it is worth looking into the dogmas of many influential leaders who sought to change the world. Among the most prominence ones that I can cite on this occasion are Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Vaclav Havel and Nelson Mandela, just to name a few. All of their doctrines and philosophies point out to a common factor that highlights “moral potential” as the nucleus to our common humanity. They argued that, political legitimacy could only be advanced by developing policies that are consistent with all the people having equal opportunity to progress.  And that any denial of fundamental human rights will hamper the political and economic progress of a society. To cultivate a progressive nation we should develop our “moral potential” to our utmost ability, which .these leaders have all set excellent examples for us to follow.

What is meant by our “moral potential”?

This, in fact, concerns our common humanity. Our moral potential is the ability, which seems to occur naturally in us as human beings, to feel empathy at the sight of the sufferings of our fellow beings. This sense of sympathy in turn can lead to a form of moral action.

However, the main point here is that, it is our moral potential that gives us our common values to humanity. It is our moral potential that gives us the capacity to appreciate our fellow beings and to sympathize with them when they are in trouble or when they are the victims of injustice. It is our moral potential which makes us cringed in horror when we saw the pictures of September 28, 2009 massacre of peaceful protesters at the Conakry Stadium. 

In fact, almost everyone can give an example of a spontaneous sense of sympathy or concern with other that they have felt at some stage in their life. Some of the most vivid examples are the horror of the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, the reaction to the tsunami calamity in the Indian Ocean, the disaster of the 2005 Katrina cyclone in New Orleans, the pictures of war victims in Sierra Leone by Sorious Samura, or the recent earthquake destructions in Haiti. Acknowledging our moral potential is necessary for us to live as human beings. It is obvious that all human beings have some form of moral obligations towards one another and the simple fact that we always forge a moral system when we live together also supports the notion that we all share a moral potential. For example, what would it mean to say we have no moral potential?  It would mean we could never trust each other. Our world then would be a world where each of us would only be capable of considering our own interest. And as such, we would look with indifference upon the weak, the suffering and even the death of others.

The killing and maiming of our citizens in various cities in our country, especially the Siguiri and Kourousa incident during our recent election, is a real case in point here, where each of the belligerent factions, the Malinke and  the Peul regards the other’s plight indifferently. But what made it even worse was that, the government’s media was very partial and unjust in their reports of the calamities. They concealed the havoc that took place in the areas dominated by the Malinke faction and fallaciously exposed only those that occurred in the areas dominated by the peul. How can we shape the minds of our people as one nation striving towards a common goal to build our nation to prosperity, if our leaders and the state media are bias, unjust and insensitive of our common humanity?

Our Duties and Obligations

In view of Dr. King’s philosophy, all of us face one fundamental task in our life, and that task is one of resisting oppressions, injustices and chauvinism. With total dedication at every step and everywhere, in the world, we should resist irrational momentum of mysterious, impersonal and illegitimate power. We must resist its complex and wholly alienating pressures in all its forms, which could possibly instill fanaticism and despotism in a society.

“We ought to draw our moral standards from our natural world, heedless of ridicule, and reaffirm its denied validity. We must honor the wise with humility and recognize the limits of that natural world and the mystery which lies beyond them. We should admit that there is something in the order of beings which evidently exceeds all our competence. We must relate to the absolute horizon of our existence which, no matter what, we shall constantly rediscover and experience. We must trust the voice of our conscience more than that of all abstract rumors that infest the atmosphere of our societies.

We ought to tackle our problems in a spirit of cooperation and unity, instead of the callous behavior that currently exist in our communities. We should instill the notion of striving together into our minds, as patriotic men and women to build a just and more harmonious society by doing everything in our capacity to make sure that our people live in a perpetual peace and a happier life with more dignity and respect for one another.

Furthermore, from the words of Vaclav Havel, “we must not be ashamed of fact that we are capable of love, friendship, solidarity, and tolerance, but… we must also set these fundamental dimensions of our humanity free from their private exile and accept them as the only genuine starting point of a meaningful human community. We must be guided by our own reason and serve the truth, the only truth, under all circumstances as our own essential experience”. Let the premise of our modest effort be that “government exists for men”, not the contrary.

Moving Beyond Election

Democratic elections are widely recognized as a foundation to legitimate government. Now it’s the time for us to move beyond election to nurture a democracy that requires respect for the rule of law, in which all persons, institutions and entities, private or public, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It’s our right and duty to build a civil society that pushes political institutions to be agile and responsive to our peoples’ need. So, to rephrase President Obama’s speech on June 4, 2009 in Cairo, Egypt, no matter what, as patriotic citizens, we should urge our government “to set a single standard for all who would hold power; to maintain its power through consent not by threat or coercion; to respect the rights of the people; to foster a spirit of tolerance and compromise; to place the interests of the people and the legitimate working of political process above all party politics.”  Without these elements, which are the core to making a true democracy, our election would be considered as nothing but a mere vain or failure. 

Conversely, after election, civil society movements ought to be less dramatic. They should, instead, opt to engage in a daily struggle against repressive laws and corruption, and to ensure the fair representation of all ethnic-groups, interests, and ideas. They should strive to find a common ground and join efforts to heal the wounds of the election without any remorse or recrimination, without anger or any rancor. What Guinea is in need today is unity, and everyone is longing for a larger measure of compassion and care that will allow us to work together for the good of our country.

Conclusion                  

As youths and future leaders of our nation, the most natural and logical development of our moral potential today is to realize that the empathy and sympathy we can feel for others can be extended or shared with all humanity. There is no reason to limit or stop at the border of tribe, city, country or religion. In fact, today, we see more and more people and institutions acknowledging our common humanity. For instance, the United Nation’s “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” acknowledges that our natural field of concern is humanity and bases it on our moral potential by referring to conscience in its first article.

 As mentioned earlier, there are many thinkers and writers who acclaims to the same sentiment besides Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. the real hero who taught us to acknowledge our human potential, (and our common humanity),. Many national constitutions, (including the constitution of Guinea – our beloved land), embrace such concepts as human rights – adherent to the rule of law. But one of our problems in presenting any form of argument in our country is the apparent “death of truth”.  Even though it is quite obvious that absolute truth appears to be unattainable, and anyone who claims to have discovered “truth” here will be instantly attacked. And this is what poses the real threat to the upward mobility and development of our nation.  We should work together as one people to eradicate this threat in our society.

In parallel with these great thinkers, we are urged as patriotic citizens to be obedient servants of our country and to desist from denying our moral potential. We should also opt to encourage our newly installed democratic government of Professor Alpha Conde to foster an ethos of a community whereby we serve each other because we need each other’s services, not because it may benefit one party. When we affirm and act on this ethos, I believe, we will properly regard one another not as tools to get what we wants, but as equals who deserves each other’s respect. More emphatically, we can only function and flourish as a fair and just society if equality is shared amongst our people. 

Finally, let us conclude by reiterating Dr. Martin Luther King’s words in a letter from Birmingham prison. These words may sound the alarm to all of us, and in particular our leaders, to deeply ponder on the current situation of our country, la Guinnée.

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inseparable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. What affects one directly, affects all indirectly”.

With regard to tolerance and politics based on inclusion and equality, this momentum is a great lesson for all Guinean to learn from America. Because, whether visible or not, every Guinean knows that, their country is infested with endemic ethnocentrism, intolerance, hatred and animosity between its diverse ethnic groups. There are, in fact, some ethnic groups who feel that they are more Guinean or more superior to the others and that no one is entitle to govern or partake in managing the country’s affaires than them. As a result they have managed this country for decades as their personal property.

Let this unique momentum of Obama’s reign or ascension to lead America, and the world at large, be a lesson for a positive change of our attitudes toward our compatriot Guineans. We should learn from this occasion to end such selfish notions. Let us be reminded that, to moveGuineaforward will require a vision of political dimension that fosters tolerance, justice, multiculturalism, equality, and the opportunity for balanced employment for our youths – the future leaders of our nation. Unless our government builds on our youth’s strengths, it will forgo the most powerful force of development and implementation. The politics of inclusion and historical redemption requires flexible and tolerant system that can sustain a harmonious and interactive diversity.

What Guinean intellectuals need at this very moment, is to have an open forum to discuss our common problems. Problems such as ethnocentrism, educational reforms, health matters, and issues of corruptions, insecurity, freedom and human rights etc… We must emulate the Americans, and take our matters in spirit of cooperation and unity. And let no one feels he is more Guinean than the other. We are all Guinean bounded in one territory, one nation, and one destiny!

Long Live OBAMA!

Long liveLa Guinée!

Long live America!

This is the general wardroom for pre-mature babies in the Maternity Center at Donka Hospital in Conakry. In the incubator  where the five babies are packed, baby number 4 is my brother’s. His wife was rushed here yesterday after an acute pain that struck her. I was led into the room by a sister-in-law who accompanied her to the center. It was 8 a.m., breakfast time. The nurse was feeding baby number 3 when I entered. She took out our baby from the vase and laid it on a bed just nearby in the corner and started to feed it with milk from a plastic cup with a plastic teaspoon. I moved closer to watch; I suddenly realized that the nurse is feeding the babies with the same spoon out of the same container. I asked my sister-in-law if they did not bring their own paraphernalia for our baby. She said that they didn’t. The nurse looked untidy and ignorant of her job. When I asked my sister-in-law, how they spent the night, she said: it was dreadful. Babies cried throughout the night, some even died pointing to a little corpse on the adjacent corner. That is the third one since we came in last night, she said.
From there I moved on to the doctors’ room where I met one who introduced himself as Dr. Bacarr Balde. Dr. Balde is a young man in his late 20s, about 5.7 feet tall, with dark complexion and a very tired look. Doctors in this section are always busy you know, he told me. Cases of pre-maturity, malnutrition, meningitis and other illness are pouring in like the currents of water falls in the mountains. And as I stood there pondering what to ask him, a woman came in with a crying child on her chest. This child was gravely ill, he examined the child at once and confirmed he is suffering from meningitis, and was referred to the standby nurse to prepare admission for treatment.
Doc! Calling his attention again, please, may I ask why those pre-mature babies cannot be placed in separate incubators? We have insufficient incubators, he responded angrily. In fact there is only one that functions properly, all the rest have some defect that renders them unusable. Can you imagine! Only one functioning incubator, when the rate of pre-mature deliveries is constantly increasing. We are not well-equipped to handle all cases that we are receiving. As a result, about 80 percent of pre-mature Babies die within a short time after birth. Some last for just five days. Doctors here are fighting an uphill battle. “Aren’t you able to do something instead of questioning me?” “Aren’t you a Guinean? Don’t you know Guinea?” “The government cares less for our plight in the health sector.” He stated angrily. I was dumb-stuck for a while, wondering what to say. I was saddened by the dreadful conditions awaiting our weakest babies.

People may obey a leader’s command because of their skills in persuasion, their oratory skills, their past success, etc. But when a society’s power is entirely dependent on its armed forces, it will be inherently unstable. In other words, any leader who rules by an army alone invites others to pull together a bigger army that will try to overthrow him. So, to provide stability or ameliorate such a situation, power has to be institutionalised. Unless we take the courage to discreetly institutionalise power, we will continue to run the risk of instability in our country.

We come to obey leaders not simply because they are stronger than we are, but because their right to rule is widely recognised. For instance, in some societies, a hereditary monarch has been seen as having the right to exercise power. And a king like King Hassan II of Morocco was accepted as a legitimate ruler. Legitimate means more than being in accordance with the laws of the country. To say a ruler is legitimate is to say that he or she has a recognised right to rule. In fact, there are few hereditary monarchs exercising real power left in the world nowadays. In Western countries, even where the form of monarchy is still surviving, as in Britain, Norway, and the Netherlands, political power is exercised by others – known as the people’s representatives. What usually confers the right to rule in such countries is election by the people. Citizens elect their leaders, usually through the agency of a political party, and these leaders hold power for a limited period, before the next election is held to determine whether or not they should continue in office. In such states, governors are accountable at periodic elections to the governed.
Democracy literally means “rule by the people” – which does not mean in practice by the whole people (for unanimity is rare) but by a majority of the people. Nevertheless, as understood in the Western context, democracy means much more than majority rule. It tempers with the idea of individual freedom and the notion of majority rule. Democracies, in particular, seek to protect their citizens from the misuse of power by leaders. A government, representing a majority, could rule arbitrarily and tyrannically unless there is a form of check and balances on government.
Moreover, a democratic constitution confers the right, or you may well say the obligation on citizens, to participate in the nation’s affairs – through voting, through membership to political parties, through membership of pressure groups such as trade unions, through meetings and manifestations etc. Thus, the more such activity is diffused amongst citizens, the more democratic rules and the rights of the individual are or will be safeguarded.

What is our common humanity as Guineans? This concerns our moral potentials as human beings living together in the same sovereign territory. It is the ability to feel sympathy or empathy at the sight of our fellow beings in sufferings. And this sagacity of empathy can in turn lead to a sense of moral action. For instance, when we say the sufferings and the massacre of peaceful protesters at the stadium in September 2009 is wrong (and should never be allowed to repeat again); the feelings or compassions we all have for our starving population doomed to constantly leave in abject poverty, and the common feelings we have for the deliberate destruction of our environment – this is what I mean by our common humanity which is in fact universal to all human beings, be it Guinea or elsewhere. I think it’s unjust and illogical to allow our tribal or ethnic-identities to override our human or national identities. The killing of our people for the sake of selfish interests in the pretext of protecting our nation is unacceptable and should never be allowed to happen again. And I encourage my fellow compatriots to forgive and let’s continue to move forward with the hope that justice and honor will one day be given to the victims.

It’s high time we start looking at Guinea from a potentialist perspective. Recognizing the fact that we possess a mass of potentials and each of us has the potential to do good, bad or indifferent; it’s time we try to decide which of theses potential we should seek to realize. And I think opting for the one that society will benefit from most is indispensable. We should bear in mind that, all our misfortunes in the struggle against backwardness could be explained as the inevitable consequence of illegitimate political system or government rather than a mysterious outbreak caused by phantoms. Logically, our human potentials could be explored as guiding principle in search of a conscientious and elaborative political legitimacy. This can be fostered by developing policies that are consistent with all our ethnics or natives, giving them the equal opportunity to benefit from our common heritage. The term benefit is used here in conformity to outcomes that are not only consistent with our values and customs as mentioned, but also with our yearning for development. Any future government should seek to desist the reliance on national political system that is partial to sub-group interest, often referred in our local languages as “angbangsande or soussounjaakhi” instead it should seek to generate benefit in a way consistent with all our citizens having the equal opportunity to gain from the prospect of development.

The lavish spending on military by the incumbent regime, (and as well as its predecessor), is a result of illegitimate political system. I know this may sound strange to you, but the fact about this is that never in the history of mankind that any illegitimate government (or junta in our case) armed to the teeth succeeded to bring security to its people. Even though militant-juntas and national leaders always proclaims or justify using force for security reason, the hard fact is that, successful use of force will never bring security. This is indeed evidence in our country. What happens is that the regime must constantly maintain military preparedness for the subsequent uprising. The main reason why I firmly believe force will never bring stability or security in a country is because force cannot defeat illegitimacy even it succeeded in crushing down uprising oppositions, it’s still illegitimate and must rely on force to survive.

I truly believe a better way to security and stability is to build a legitimate political system through the ballot (and I wish every Guinean a success in the upcoming run-off election). Unless we succeed in voting our leaders democratically, force or illegitimate rule will achieve nothing other than an intermission for the next uprising. Furthermore, once we open our eyes to the illegitimacy of the current system we can see the perpetual eruption and instability as a flowed illegal political system. And learning form history will help us build upon our moral potential to develop solidarity concepts that will eventually lead to our sense of common humanity. Without having a moral potential, no one can be trusted and we will never be able to form a well functioning society. In such instances, we are left with no option but to opt for a common feeling of national identity; identifying ourselves with the state as patriot Guineans, (not as tribalists, regionalists, or religionists), having a common goal to defend our nation from all short of misfortunes like poverty, disease, insecurity and to demand political justice for every citizen within our sovereignty. We ought to abandon all short of identification pertaining to tribe, religion and the like, which has always turned to be an artificial conception of socially constructed group rather than an inherent part of our existence.

The people of Guinea have, for several decades, experienced in an unprecedented degree of mysteries of evil, falsehood and manipulation; we can’t afford to continue this path any longer. To break this deadlock, our politicians should opt for the politics of truth, inclusion and equality. And our expectation from future reforms and political system is the opportunity to cultivate our moral potential in order to make social life more amiable among our citizens. Finally, we also expect the new leadership to banish the governance of manipulation and deception, without sweeping away this evil we will never develop a trusting or loving relationship with one another. So the greatest threat in our society today is the lack of cultivating our moral potential due to false manipulation or the adherent to factionalism and ethnocentrism. In other words, as a result of the failure to develop our moral potential to identify our commonality as human being “born free with equal dignity and rights”, as enshrined in article one in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, we are been labeled as “couyon” which literally mean stupid. We should resist such labeling by breaking the deadlock through our common humanity which certainly is the compassion and love we develop for each other in time of distress and affliction. God bless la Guinée.

Guinea is neither a barren nor a poor country. In fact we are one of the luckiest nations in the world to be endowed with all the bounties of nature and human resources, especially, the most vital of all, and that is, people with ingenious talents, which I believe if properly managed (and fairly enough), none of us would be poor or become destitute as we are at the present moment. The greatest challenges of our future society are to fairly and efficiently manage these given resources and to harness the talents and the skills of every individual in a way that could benefit us all. Like leaders, as well as intellectuals, we must show warm humanity to our people, have sympathy for our human frailties and weaknesses, and we ought to be interested in everything that concerns our society. Finally, let us turn to the last but not the least point of this discussion, which is the responsibility of intellectuals in a society.

Frankly speaking, the result of freedom must depend on the values which the free individual seeks to pursue. So the conception of social justice must prevail if a free society is to be preserved. Thus the real task of the intellectual is to do all in his/her intellectual power or creativity to disseminate the appropriate moral conviction in order to preserve freedom and justice for all. Intellectuals, in general, should be aware of the fact that independent creative men and women have the freedom and the right to act as political sensors, therefore they should not shut themselves behind concrete walls (or ivory towers) claiming innocent and ignoring what is happening around them. They ought to know that participation in public life is an act of individual responsibility to society. Dante once said in one his epoch poem, The Devine Comedy (1321), that “the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality.” In a similar context, while addressing the UN in 1963, Ethiopia’s Emperor Haile Selassie, once said: “Through out history it has been the inaction of those who could have acted, the indifference of those who should have known better, the silence of the voices of justice when it mattered most that made it possible for evil to triumph.”

Nevertheless, the final responsibility of the intellectual is to serve as a preacher at the gate, and no more. We must preserve our freedom by standing cautiously on the periphery of politics and to warn of what is happening, while we sit permanently on the boundary. The intellectual should seek to pave the way between the prophets of dooms who refused to dip even the tip of their toes into politics, and the technocrats who wallow in it with open delights. Intellectuals should be very cautious not to be enslaved by the political apparatus, or by the pattern of thought and behaviour of professional politicians. But, equally so, I do believe we should reject the option of preaching to others what we do not practice or without ourselves entering the fray. “History belongs to doers.” This brings us to our main conclusion.

Guineans today are living under the pretence of freedom, the very kind of freedom we detested from the French colonialist during our sought for independence. Nationalist leaders, like Sekou Toure, during the struggle for independence had declared that, after the departure of the colonialist, they would marshal democracy, good governance and all-round development which were no doubt pious declarations. But none of them even their successors did not live up to their promise. Nonetheless, I urge that every Guinean citizen to have optimistic views – no matter what – to rally ourselves to usher our path to development and prosperity. We should seek for solutions that will pave the way for social and political reforms that will enhance tolerance and unity amongst our citizens. Again, let me reiterate peace could only be achieved if there is security and justice, and prosperity comes when and only when we are free of oppressions.

Moreover, experience suggests that views and opinions held (put forward) by intellectuals could become the governing force of politics. The character and process by which these intellectuals’ views influence the politics of tomorrow is very important. As for freedom, any leader who stamped an X (or who gave deaf ears) on the freedom of intellectuals could becomes “a prisoner of hatred locked behind the bars of prejudice and narrow-mindedness” (Mandela 1994). And such a leader would not be freed unless he/she falls on their knees in respect to the MIGHTY PEN of the intellectual.

In conclusion, let me remind my compatriots that, we need government to preserve our freedom. It is an instrument through which we exercise our freedom, yet by concentrating power into a single political hand it becomes a threat to our freedom. Hence, never again shall we allow any of our future governments to monopolize its power. God bless la Guinée!

Consequently, everyone in a free state is fully responsible for his/her actions. This is not the case in a state or society where freedom is hampered by despots. For example, in Guinea, what goes right is mostly or always attributed to its incumbent leader. The present situation of frantic crowd dancing their hell-out on every street-corner of major cities in Guinea for Sékou Konate, the incumbent interim transitional president, just for a mere election that he himself acknowledged to have been rigged could be regarded here as a case in point. Every fortune and success in the election is now been attributed to him, forgetting that he is merely assigned there to do a specific task initiated by the populace under the close observation and guidance of the international community. What is there to be attributed to a man who kept deaf-ears to the voices of our people calling for justice when it was most needed? Furthermore, everything (or all) that goes/went wrong no one is ever been held responsible. In fact, it is not even talk about or heard of. Take for instance, the inauguration of the newly constructed bridge in Boffa at the Fatala River in 2005; the then government bragged high in the sky as if the cost of building the bridge was their personal hard earned money. It was name after our past leader (General Lansan Conte), just as the name given to the new “bungalow” Public University located at Sonfonia. Besides, the case of our former Prime Minister (PM), Lounseny Fall, could serve as a typical example of the wrongs that no one takes responsibility of. Who do you think was responsible for our MP’s defection? Let me reiterate, I did not ask why he defected, but who was responsible? The term, “defection,” which I used in this case is more appropriate than the term “resignation” as proclaimed by the authority, because technically, he did not resigned, else we would have been informed by the government. But absolutely nothing was heard of it, except from the rumours and the foreign media.

Before I turn to the other side of the coin, let me briefly elaborate upon a fact which every Guineans ought to be familiar with but is often forgotten. “That freedom is the matrix required for the growth of moral values of a society.” And this is quite obvious, because it is only when individuals have the choice to determine their inherent responsibilities that they will have the occasion to affirm existing values and to contribute to its further growth – to earn themselves moral merit. One should note that free societies have always nurtured law abiding citizens and in our modem era this has been the source of all humanitarian movements and activities aiming actively to help the weak, the sick, the poor, and the oppressed. On the other hand, unfree societies normally develop disrespect for the law and callous attitudes towards each other, deploring the weak and the innocents. This brings us to the central issues we are facing, and these contribute to the most awful moment in the history of our nation. I consider it as nothing but the issues of human rights, freedom, insecurity and injustice. These are directly related to our moral values, and as a consequence we are living on the thresholds of a period which particularly everything our livelihood, our future, the future of our love ones is at a great risk. Unless we firmly assume our individual responsibility to society to discharge our rightful duties as concerned citizens, our nation will be doomed to continuous stagnation and underdevelopment.

Moreover, by the term intellectual here, I mean the class of many professional men and women – such as the scientists, doctors, engineers, professors and lectures, business executives, musicians etc.- whose respective expert knowledge on their own fields are worth to be listened to, with respect to most others. There is no doubt of the truth that the power of these intellectuals, who make their peculiar opinions on issues of general concern, influences decision makers or politicians in general. When a nation is in turmoil, the most vulnerable men and women would desperately seek to inject new contents into political life. But what I observed in this country is that, the so-called classical elites or intellectuals, who come from various academic fields of knowledge that should have act as watch-dogs of political life, deliberately confined themselves in a sort of an ivory tower claiming innocence and completely disregarding what is happening around them. And I am poised to ask: is it right for people to ignore the phantom that is destroying the very freedom they are bound to protect? Are they not accountable for what is happening around them?

In my view, this has been, in fact, the frequent conflict mentioned in both the Holly Qur’aan and the Bible between man and his God. We have been given the free-will by God, but He will hold us responsible for making whatever decision, right or wrong, since we are the only creatures on earth that are given the top-intelligence to determine what is right or wrong. Certainly, people are accountable for all that what is happening around them. And frankly speaking, it is impossible to struggle against dictatorships, while, at the same time we continue to adhere to the structure that favoured the system. In order to put my point clearly, let me quote The Economist Laureate, Milton Freedman. In his book, Capitalism and Freedom (1982), he stated that: “The free man will ask neither what his country can do for him nor what he can do for his country. He will rather ask: What can my compatriots and I do through government to help us discharge our individual responsibilities, to achieve our several goals and purposes, and above all, to protect our freedom?” And this question is accompanied by another, which is most relevant to our present political situation. And that is: “How can we keep the upcoming (newly elected) government from becoming a Frankenstein that destroys the very freedom it is establish to protect?” Freedom is something rare and delicate; it’s like a seed in the process of germination. History and experience has thought us that, the greatest threat to freedom is the concentration of power or what I call political monopoly.

At this point, let me remind my fellow Guineans of a disturbing event that we may face in the future, should we decide to let the bygones be bygones. Imagine yourself 10 to 20 years form now, when one of your grand-child would one day ask: Grand-dad or Granny! Where were you or what did you do when such and such were happening in our country? Didn’t you think of the future generation? We most be cautioned here, because failing to answer this questions enthusiastically will render us culprits to his/her generation. As an intellectual, I am deeply bordered by the fear of anticipating such questions without having the right answer to respond. This brings us to the main appeal in this current discussion which is to rescue our nation by or through a unanimous voice of intellectual awareness to our daunting problems. This is the subject of the final part of our discussion for the next posting. God bless la Guinée!

Guinea ranks amongst the richest in natural wealth in Africa, and has been a sovereign state for nearly 52 years, yet it ranks one of the poorest of the poor in the developing world. A lot of Guineans, like me, are worried about the future of our nation. And we are facing a future of continuous challenges and rapid changes. The country has suffered enormous stagnation and backwardness under despotic regimes and military dictatorship. As a result, many questions are in order for the conscious-minded Guinean – currently eager to democratically elect a new leadership to steer the country forward. How do we organize our society to face the challenges that lies ahead of our newly elected government? How do we achieve progress through our people? This is not just what we may regard as communication exercise; it does really need a short of different mindset. Like Noah’s Arch, our country is sinking and there will be no survivor if the so-called intellectuals of this nation do not come to its rescue. But how would they if they are not free to express themselves. It’s really a delicate issue that need some shrewd thought in dept. Certainly, not everyone will agree with my point of view, and neither will I agree with everything other say on various issues. This is why I believe dialogues and genuine debates among intellectuals are most apt and proper. Guinean intellectuals need to have an open forum to discourse common problems and matters plaguing the country – such as ethnocentrism, educational crisis, health matters and issues on corruption, insecurity, civil-military relations, freedom, human rights abuses and injustice etc. We must take our problems in a spirit of cooperation and unity rather than the callous individualistic attitude that prevails. In the eve of the new and democratically elected government, I deliberately sought for the encouragement of all intellectuals to come forth with their opinions, views, and ideals of good governance, security and justice – ideals that will promote unity, peace, and progress amongst Guineans. We must instill the notion of striving together into the minds of our compatriots to build a just (fair) and more harmonious society by doing everything in our capacity, as intellectuals or policy makers, to ensure that our people live a happy life with more dignity and respect for one another. This discussion will also stress the path which we ought to take in the common struggle to move Guinea forward; and for intellectual to assume their full responsibility to society they must be free from oppressions and despotism.

By freedom, I mean the right to do what you want without being controlled or restricted. In other words, freedom is defined as “the independence of an arbitrary will of another.” According to the Austrian-born, Noble Laureate, Professor Hayek, “this is the classical conception of freedom under the law” – a state of affairs in which a person could be forced or impelled only where restriction is required by the general rule of law. Such a freedom must be equally applicable to all without any discretionary decision of the authority. Thus, intellectual freedom could be defined as the right of the intellectual to freely express his views, ideals and opinions creatively without censorship, and fear for persecution or alienation.

Like all individuals, to enable the intellectual to fully fulfil his potentials and responsibility to society, he should be given or allowed the complete freedom of expression and to act on his own initiatives (without any fear) to express his opinions in what so-ever interest him in society or in life. I believe that people must be encouraged to come forward with their opinions, views and ideals of good governance, development, security and justice – ideals that will promote unity and peace, and most important of all progress. The simple fact is that, we seek individual liberty because only when the individual can decide what to do, can he be able to exploit his unique combination of knowledge, skills, and capacity which no one else could fully duplicate.

When the freedom of an intellectual is restricted or curtailed he feel an X stamped on his moral values to society and as a result he becomes a real prisoner of conscience, confining him into a prison like that of the “chicken wondering freely about within the limits of the poultry yard whose freedom could not change any thing in its fate. Or he is like that of the condemned prisoner whose movement is confined in the prison camp within the walls of the jail” (President Sékou Touré). Thus, analogically, intellectual freedom in this country is confined only within the Ivory Towers (or the walls of university campuses). In fact, to put it bluntly, our intellectual freedom as teachers, for instance, is not beyond the classroom in front our students. For doctors, theirs are confined within the surroundings of their HOSPITAL wards and so are the other intellectuals imprisoned in their own various fields of professional activities.

Is this not the type of freedom that the late President Ahmed Sékou Touré detested or abhorred during his vehement campaign to free this nation form the French colonial powers? Although he failed to deliver the freedom he sought for his people, there is no dispute about his ideological intention. His ideal symbol of freedom was shared unanimously by the masses and that was as he stated:“the freedom of the sparrow-hawk, master of its flight in the sky.” How could we let ourselves to be confined into such an infinite psychological imprisonment? Don’t we really have a choice? I know everyone complain about the moral of the present system, and as an intellectual, I truly believe we do have a choice. But, some of the questions are whether we are in reality ready to build and support viable institutions that will explore the laws enshrine in our constitution. Can we open up our minds as patriotic Guineans, (not as Peul, Malinké or Soussou etc.) to debate common issues affecting the progress of our society?

Judging from people’s pessimistic views about our future (or where we are really heading), I wonder whether this nation would be ready for a genuine dialogue to map out our challenges and get ride of our malice and alienation. In fact, I have heard some provocative sentiments from colleagues that, “people cannot to be freed until they are fit to use their freedom.” Isn’t that a clumsy provocation to the sound and conscious mind? Just like the fool in the old fairy tail who resolved not to go into the water until he had learned to swim. If people are to wait for their freedom till they become wise and good enough, then they may wait for ever. We cannot just sit and wait for things to happen any longer, we must make them happen. Politically, we have flunked with socialism, killed liberalism, misused dogmatism, so our only ism left to be conquered is patriotism. We will continue to make our point more clearly by viewing the contrast in part two in the next posting. God bless la Guinée!

Perhaps these enthusiasts who are dancing high and low in his praise ought to be reminded that Konate was second in command to Mousa Dadis Camara who orchestrated the September 28, 2009 massacre – that claimed over 157 lives of our citizens. While the enthusiasts are dancing in his praise for doing nothing spectacular, so far in my view, he is pretty occupied amassing power in the same way his predecessor has done. He has in fact succeeded in soliciting absolute loyalty by promoting all the militia-junta’s assigned in their early stage of takeover as governors in the country’s regional district headquarters to the rank of Army Generals. Their loyalty pledges to him are echoed in daily national TV. What Konate should be reminded of is that people do not willingly submit to illegitimate power but they do so because they are not strong enough. I would urge the Guinean people to know that if they wish to save Guinea from the great mess we are in, and rescue our people from poverty and degradation, they should stop the hypocritical dancing and praising of bull-heads without any valor and stand together to oppose national tyranny and phantom militias whose aim is to amass power in the interest of their clan.

In conclusion, I must assert that any man who accomplishes a special task of such a transition successfully is worthy of praise. So, let’s wait for Sekouba Konate to complete his job before we fully honor and appraise him. Meanwhile the Guinean people are more worthy of praise for their courage and effort to peacefully exercise their democratic right to elect their leader. By observing the spirit with which the majority of the Guinea population is handling this state of affairs, one would be inclined to remain hopeful and optimistic of the nation’s future. God bless la Guinee!