70% of its inhabitants live on under NZ$0.61 a day.
So King Mswati, the absolute ruler of Swaziland, with 13 wives, who goes on multi-million pound shopping sprees with them, who suppresses political dissent, who owns helicopters, limousines and palaces, looks pretty vile.
Swazis actually like him, in spite of it all says The Times, or they are too busy to fight, dying or fearful of being arrested.
In 2000 he called for everyone with HIV to be branded and sterilised, which didn't happen. Then he called for a five year ban on sex, which he didn't respect, naturally.
Life expectancy is around 30 years.
You'll notice Bob Geldof, Bono, Madonna, Oxfam and other great advocates for Africa doing their bit to demand this vile corrupt kleptocracy be overthrown and for part of the King's wealth to be used to fund the infrastructure needed to provide some health care, instead of blaming the West.
Fortunately the UK supplies no official bilateral aid to Swaziland. That's a small relief at least.
2 comments:
We shouldn’t let these lavish celebrations hide the very real human rights abuses that are taking place in Swaziland. The King rules by decree, political parties are banned and the parliament has no powers. The King selects the Prime Minister. This week police fired rubber bullets and tear gas at marchers protesting for democracy. While the King has a wealth estimated at 200 million US dollars, seven in ten people in Swaziland live in abject poverty earning less than one US dollar a day. Six in ten people rely on international food aid and four in ten are said to be moving from hunger to starvation. Swaziland also has the highest rate of HIV infection in the world. For more information on human rights issues in Swaziland visit my blog at www.swazimedia.blogspot.com
Anon - I think that it is wrong to judge Swaziland by todays Western Democratic Standards? Before the Magna Carta the English were in a very similar situation as the Swazi are in today - and the Swazi probably have not yet reached the equivalent level of social development that the English had then.
Post a Comment