Nahas on Tipeeg, congress and NDF food tender

Namibian Sun (NS): You took over the defence portfolio in 2012, after serving as prime minister for seven years. Did you deem that as a demotion? Nahas Angula (NA): Being prime minister only means you are a minister senior to others. It’s a position where the incumbent is required to closely assist the President. For me it doesn’t really matter whether one is a prime minister or a minister heading a particular portfolio. Of course for those who love status and power, perhaps you’d think that when you are a prime minister you are more powerful. But I am not interested in either status of power. It is never my consideration. My interest is what kind of impact I can make. NS: Then what do you think was the strategy around moving you to the Defence Ministry? NA: I cannot second-guess the President. I cannot tell you what his strategy of moving me to this ministry is. That question legitimately belongs to the President, not me. NS: Some people are not convinced you were effective as prime minister. What are the highlights of your tenure? NA: Many things were happening there, but there were a lot of challenges. One challenge was of course to co-ordinate government so that there is impact of government programmes on the people, economy and stability. But co-ordinating people, who you never appointed [ministers] is a delegated kind of responsibility. Some co-operated and some did not because I did not appoint them. People were focusing on the upcoming Swapo congress of 2012, so whatever you do as a prime minister, your political competitors in most cases would not want you to succeed. That’s why programmes like economic empowerment could not go through. Other politicians know that if it goes through, I will get credit. In their own corners, they would make sure that you don’t succeed. That’s the kind of atmosphere that prevailed, as people focused on the congress. Many things that I thought I should do to make a real impact on society were not achieved. It is frustrating when some colleagues are not working with you. Another challenge was the ambush on a civilian car not far from Omega. It happened while the President was in the United States. It’s a security matter and the killers disappeared into Angola. Then there was the issue of shebeens, when demonstrators camped at parliament and slaughtered cattle there - having braais. Also, the ex-combatants went camping around, singing at midnight to make sure the President doesn’t sleep. Then there were the issues of the Millennium Challenge Account, labour unrest at Ramatex and TransNamib, and many other issues that I had to deal with. They took a toll me on me to the extent that at one point I was hospitalised for fatigue. I am, however, proud that during my time as prime minister, Namibians had greater access to my office. I used to call my office ‘Sesame Street’, where people came in at free will. It gave me an insight into people’s problems. When young people came to my office, I even wrote letters of recommendation to whoever is concerned, asking them to help these people in any way they can. In the final analysis, I did my part but I am not sure how successful I have been. NS: Tipeeg was initiated under your tenure and is deemed a spectacular failure at the moment. What went wrong? NA: Tipeeg had great potential, but the design of its implementation was not properly thought through. Tipeeg could have solved unemployment in this country. If you employed different types of approaches, such as training young people and giving money to the Development Bank of Namibia to provide loans to specific entrepreneurs, things would have worked. N$3 billion in three years is a massive investment, but those who were managing the money decided that Tipeeg should just be a standard programme, like what we do with the development budget. The main beneficiaries of this initiative are the contractors, many of whom are not even Namibians. Money got exported out of this country because of that approach. My colleagues at the Ministry of Finance and the National Planning Commission could have thought through this thing, but they did not help the President to really achieve the broader goal for socio-economic development. Like I said earlier, as prime minister I did not have full control and co-operation of the colleagues. I remember writing a letter to the Director-General of the National Planning Commission [Tom Alweendo] to say that they must have a component of training to give young people skills. That letter was not even acknowledged. Those have been my misgivings of this well-intended programme. NS: You are seen as an education man and not a soldier. How are you coping as Minister of Defence? NA: When we were in exile, all of us were soldiers. My first training was in 1973 when I finished university. We had a military base called Kaunga Marsh in Western Zambia, where I went for training for six months. I was also once recalled from the United Nations after the death of the late Linekela Kalenga to come to Luanda. I went for training at Hainyeko, where I was trained by Soviet instructors. So military to me is not something strange. But I am not at this ministry to command a battalion. I am here to give political leadership to the Defence Ministry. I am enjoying my job. NS: Is Namibia involved in any international military operations at the moment? NA: Yes we have a lot of military observers within the UN system. They are in Darfur, South Sudan, Liberia, Ivory Coast and other places. We are not there as combatants, but only as observers. NS: There has been massive publicity surrounding the Ministry of Defence food tender. What exactly were the issues? NA: Well, apparently the system has been that soldiers were being fed through private tenders. That obviously invites all sorts of things. So Max Hamata (editor of Confidenté newspaper) broke the story that there was something fishy about the food tender. Before that, I was not aware that that this is how soldiers were being fed. So when this came to light, I asked the colleagues here about the matter. I said it was not correct to feed soldiers through private tenders. We cannot feed soldiers with food whose origins we do not know. How do you protect yourself as a military? I suggested that we must establish a company of our own that will take over the task of supplying soldiers with food. I heard that a culture has developed where people from this ministry are benefiting from these tenders in one way or another. As such, there were some resistance in the corridors against establishing a company. But I insisted that this idea will stimulate support for the local economy. I was embarrassed when Honourable [Phillemon] Moongo once stated in parliament that defence was sourcing fish from Thailand, while we have fish in our own country. Obviously winners of tenders want to source cheaper things and make a profit. We can’t use soldiers for business purposes. It is ethically not correct. So we asked August 26 [a company owned by the Defence Ministry] to establish a subsidiary, August 26 Logistics, which will then find partners to do this job. My directive was that government must own 51% of the new company, so that we can maintain control over it. We were dragged to court but luckily the court dismissed the application. NS: You’ve always had a soft spot for the struggle kids. Will we see their increased inclusion in the defence force now that you are the helm? NA: This time around we are putting greater emphasis on the standards we want to achieve in the army. We are small population trying to defend a large territory. This requires a force that is agile, professional and properly equipped. Defence can no longer continue to be an employment platform. We will accommodate whoever meets these requirements. We won’t compromise. My sympathy for struggle kids is purely from a humanistic view. I give them donations every month to sustain themselves. NS: There was a deadly military helicopter crash last month. How far are the investigations? NA: Investigations were carried out. The law requires that the chief of the defence force establishes an investigation committee, consisting of members of our defence force and assisted by a team from the manufacturer, in this case the Chinese. Their findings have been received by the chief of defence and we are in the process of sending the report to State House. It’s up to State House whether or not release that information to the public.