Former Kabushi Member of Parliament Bowman Lusambo has been reported to the Woodlands Police Station by Zambezi East MP Brian Kambita over allegations of obtaining K850,000 under false pretenses in a property deal. The complaint, filed on October 15, 2024, accuses Lusambo of promising to sell Kambita a house in the Silverest area of Lusaka but failing to deliver. According to Police Spokesperson Rae Hamoonga, Lusambo allegedly persuaded Kambita to buy a four-bedroom house with modern fittings, for which Kambita paid in two installments: K400,000 in August and K450,000 in September.

The transaction turned contentious when Kambita learned that the property might be tied up in a broader investigation by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), preventing its legal sale. This revelation sparked further scrutiny, as Lusambo, already entangled in multiple legal battles, has faced similar controversies over property acquisition and alleged financial misconduct in recent years. Earlier in 2024, Lusambo was acquitted of witness tampering charges, though he still awaits judgments on other cases related to suspected financial crimes and unaccounted wealth, including assets in Silverest previously flagged by the ACC for investigation

This incident with Kambita underscores ongoing concerns about illicit property deals and the extent of Lusambo’s legal troubles, which have cast a shadow on his political career. Both Lusambo and his spouse, Nancy Lusambo, are subject to ongoing probes by the ACC, raising questions about how such properties were financed, with investigators pointing to irregularities tied to his time in office.

source: Police Spokesperson Rae Hamoonga

By Edward Chisanga

I follow up on the excellent article published by Bertie Jacobs in the Lusaka Times of November 2, 2024, entitled, “What impact will the US election have on Africa?”
When Barack Obama, whose father was a black Kenyan and mother a white American became President of the USA in 2009, one African joked that Africans were more thrilled than the Americans. I was in a pub in Geneva, Switzerland, having a beer and watching football when a Kenyan living in the same town began dancing without any music. He certainly had nothing in his ears to suggest that he was listening to a mobile phone music.
Since I knew him, I approached him to ask why he was dancing without sound. He embarrassingly answered me, “You must be the only African in Geneva who has not heard the world’s news today.” When I asked what this milestone was, his sharp answer was that every African in the world especially those in the continent are all dancing to President Obama’s ascendancy to the highest office in the world.

I asked, “Why would that make me dance?” He retorted to humiliate me, “You know Obama is Kenyan, so the USA has a Kenyan President,” I answered back, “I’m aware that Obama was born of a Kenyan African father but am not aware that that made him Kenyan or African.” Standing his ground, he insisted, “No, he is not American because his father is Kenyan.”
As I clearly was not winning the fight, I diverted his attention and asked, “What really is at the heart of this conversation?” He turned to face one of his fellow Kenyans and shouted, “It is good for Kenya. It is good for Africa. Kenya will trade more with the USA. Africa will trade more with the USA and create more wealth for its citizens. After all, the USA is the largest export market that every country dreams to partner. Africa too does.” My humble answer was, “That may not be exactly correct.”

This Kenyan was not alone in making generalized claims. Many Africans, in particular leaders thought the same. They must have hoped that Obama would exempt them from honouring their governance and human rights global commitments. Anakwa Dwamena quotes a Zambian economist, Grieve Chelwa and says, “On the day of Obama’s inauguration, a cab driver in Kinshasa, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, told Grieve, “Since a black man is the president of USA, things are finally going to change for us black people.” He meant change for the better for he and other Africans. He further states, “The general sentiment was that Obama, whose grandfather was a cook for the British in Kenya, would have a personal investment in Africa.
Guy Scott, former President of Zambia is also quoted as saying, “Most people call him an American African instead of an African American.” John Campbell, America’s former Ambassador to Nigeria was quoted by Edward-Isaac Dovere of Politico, “That the President had a Kenyan father, many Africans seemed to think the was somehow going to be their president. When lo and behold he remained the president of the USA, they were disappointed. That’s more of an Africa problem than an Obama problem.” Years have passed since Obama left office and the main judgement from most people, at least the authors of articles that I have read about is something similar to Edward-Isaac Dovere’s summary: “Despite family ties to Kenya, Barack Obama has arguably done less for the continent than his predecessors.” In other words, Obama’s rule is far from matching Africa’s expectations.

The image in Figure 1 below does not reflect the Kenyan sentiments.

The image in Figure 1 below shows important statistical information about the trade partnership between Africa and the USA, in particular during the Presidency of Bill Clinton, George Bush and Barack Obama. For Africa, Clinton’s legacy is largely manifested in granting African countries duty free market access through the establishment of the Africa Growth Opportunities Act (AGOA) unilateral trade preferences which allows Africa’s most products, in particular textiles and clothing to be exported to the USA almost free of duty. Ideally, this gesture was meant to help Africa boost its industries in this sector in order to produce and export. During Bush’s period, from 2001-2009, we see a trending period of increased growth in exports in absolute values, from $20.1 billion in 2002 to $109.2 billion, in fact the highest peak.
When Obama took over in 2009, he found Africa’s exports in absolute value to the USA had receded to $57.3 billion. There was improvement to about $90 billion during his time, between 2010-2011. However, this was offset by a sharp decline down to about $30 billion when he left office in 2017. The unfortunate thing is that many people will look at the trend between the second highest peak of exports in 2011 and 2017 when Obama left office. This is a period I might refer to as Africa’s period of slowly but surely eroding trade relationship with the USA. While African Heads of State were asking the USA to make further extension for AGOA in 2018, to expire in 2025, the world was witnessing the lowest peak of the continent’s exports to the world’s largest market.
Over the years Africa, especially commodity countries have diversified exports to China but not diversified or upgraded products. If you remember, AGOA has conditions attached to it and these include mostly issues bordering on good governance, namely, establishment of market-based economy, rule of law, economic policies to reduce poverty, protection of internationally recognized worker rights, and efforts to combat corruption. Most of the fifty-five African countries have access to AGOA.

It was not Obama’s fault but that of Africa.
The main outstanding reason why Africa’s exports to the USA are declining is the structural problem of lack of supply and production of dynamic products. Market access for textiles and clothing products is largely unfulfilled while Bangladesh and other Asian countries that are blocked from that access wait at the doorstep hoping the USA would soon open for them. In a way, one would not be wrong to point out that by persistently asking for perpetual extension of AGOA, Africa has been tantalizing the USA for something it would not fulfil. The promise that extension would be followed by expanded exports will not be coming home soon.
Picking on Africa’s top twenty exporters of goods which in 2008 accounted for 99 per cent of Africa’s total exports to the USA, I found that the majority of the same countries had recorded sharp declines in 2018. For example, Nigeria’s exports dropped from $33.0 billion to $5.0 billion, that is by minus $28.0 billion; Algeria’s dropped from $18.9 to $2.2 billion, a loss of $14.3 billion and South Africa’s fell from $7.9 to 6.3 billion. About seven countries registered positive exports but the values in dollar terms were very low or less than $1.0 billion each. Kenya’s exports to the USA dropped from a peak of $1.6 billion in 2014 to $534.0 million in 2018. This data certainly confirms that the sharp decline in Africa’s exports from $109.2 billion in 2008 to $31.2 billion in 2018 was largely a result of the combination of factors coming from all the top twenty exporters.

They all show significant individual impact on the overall continental exports. One important explanation is that the majority of these countries are mineral and petroleum oil exporters that may have switched to China. As an example, Angola’s exports to China totalled $$18.6 billion in 2018 compared to $$1.7 billion to the USA. Yet, in 2000, Angola exported $3.7 billion to the USA compared to $1.8 billion to China. On the other hand, there may be other rationale why individual countries lessened their exports to the USA but the fact is that they did. But I think most of them have simply failed to face the challenge to utilize free market access due to domestic problems related to inability to produce tradeable products.

If you don’t export manufactured goods, you’re not trading

One of the objectives of AGOA was to help African countries to export value added products, in particular textiles and clothing. But events on the ground show that this is far from achieved. I agree with the second part of John Campbell’s conclusion about Africa in the quotation I provided earlier when he says, “That’s more of an Africa problem than an Obama problem.” The countries like Bangladesh and Viet Nam that face higher import tariffs in the USA are exporting more manufactured goods than Africa.
Viet Nam’s exports of manufactured goods to the USA of $43.2 billion is six-fold that of Africa’s $7.2 billion. Bangladesh, an Asian least developed country exports $5.6 billion or almost same as Africa. Trade between Africa and the USA may have contributed to job creation and improved economic activities. But dollar values for each country in manufactured goods, the most important part of trade are simply too low to effectively reduce poverty in Africa. South Africa, the largest producer of manufactured goods in Africa exported to the USA only $2.7 billion in 2018; Egypt $1.4 billion, Morocco $1.1 billion and the rest of the countries each less than $600million. An examination of Africa’s exports of textiles and clothing products to the USA equally shows disappointing performance.

Did Obama disappoint Africa?
No. Africa disappointed Obama. As I said earlier, most believe that Obama disappointed Africa.

Will Harris help grow Africa’s economy?

No. Unless a significant change takes place among African leaders, (and I see none in the near future), it’ll be the same if Kamara Harris wins presidency. I’m sure that today, Africa’s expectations are as high as they were when Obama became President. African leaders dream of a Harris presidency. But it means nothing if they cannot take advantage economically.
The change will only come when Africa begins to invest in building a different type of human capital. African leaders must sow seeds of cognitive function by investing in early child development, in particular when children are between 1 and five years. We have some Zambian experts who’re trying to champion this agenda and need government support. Look for Professor Kavwanga Yambayamba and listen for only 30 minutes what he has to say. Leaders of today may not benefit from this investment. But, they’ll forever be remembered as the great African leaders by future generations. Only then will Africa build a reasonable partnership with the USA, with or without black leadership.

By Bertie Jacobs

On Tuesday 5 November, Americans will cast their votes to elect the 47th president of the United States of America. The latest polls shows that the current vice president and Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris, has a slight, one point lead, with Republican and former president, Donald Trump, a very close second. This is a neck and neck race with no certain outcome, and the world waits to see who will lead the last global superpower from 2025 to 2029.

Across the Atlantic, Africans also have a vested interest in the outcome of the election. Here is what two political experts from the North-West University (NWU) in South Africa have to say about what a Trump or Harris victory will mean for the continent.

Prof Kedibone Phago, director of the NWU’s School for Government Studies:

“We have already noticed several of Donald Trump’s domestic and foreign policy positions that largely prioritises the US during his previous administration. He focused his attention on growing the US economy. This also occurred against a backdrop of several threats to reduce funding for international bodies such as the World Health Organization (WHO), North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and similar arrangements. His focus on the US economy, immigration, conflicts, and climate change is expected to be more aggressive.

There are at least two key issues to consider regarding Africa. The first is the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a trade agreement between African countries and the US that allows duty-free access to US markets. South Africa is a major beneficiary, and its participation is largely a lifeline for AGOA. Excluding South Africa from AGOA would be both meaningless and counterproductive, though a Trump presidency might be expected to threaten this agreement.

Secondly, the US is one of the main trading partners for a number of African countries. A Trump presidency could mean that some African countryies’ geopolitical positioning may be put under immense pressure to either choose friends and allies of the US to maintain favourable and friendly relations with the US.”

Kamala Harris is currently the vice president representing the Democratic Party and is likely to retain most policies of the Biden administration. She has already visited Africa, projecting a positive stance of her administration towards the continent. She is expected to support the continuation of AGOA with eligible African states that are benefiting from this agreement.”

Dr Sysman Motloung, Political and international relations expert:

“The 2024 US elections focus on issues surrounding racism and sexism, with some alleging that Donald Trump embodies these values, versus the restoration of reproductive rights, including abortion, championed by Kamala Harris. Trump has also been blamed for disrupting abortion rights in the US. However, he claims to protect women by addressing illegal border crossings and crime.

The US elections are a domestic affair, with both presidential candidates making strong statements to portray each other as unfit for the White House. Kamala Harris describes Trump as ‘unhinged’, a ‘fascist’, a ‘Nazi’, and even compares him to Hitler, while Trump retorts by labelling Harris a fascist.

Take South Africa as an example. For us South Africans observing this political discourse, it’s reminiscent of local rhetoric, where terms like ‘rented black’, ‘anti-revolutionary’, and amasela (thieves) are commonly used. Similarly, the Democratic Alliance often calls on South Africans to ‘save’ the country by voting the African National Congress out. In this vein, Harris urges Americans to ‘save the country’ by voting Trump out. Such is the nature of political battles.

Regarding what it would mean for African countries if Trump or Harris wins, the impact is minimal.

Again, let’s look at South Africa as a point of departure. US foreign policy is generally consistent, and the US will remain committed to maintaining bilateral and trade relations with South Africa. Military cooperation between the two countries will continue. Trump, if elected, would not push South Africa to reverse its abortion rights simply because of his stance on the issue within the US. The US presidency will still expect South Africa to address the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey listing, and collaboration on combatting organised crime will persist. Other African countries can expect the same.

The US has a vested interest in ensuring the US dollar maintains its status as the world’s reserve currency. A close look at both candidates’ platforms reveals a primary focus on domestic issues, with little emphasis on foreign policies that might negatively impact African countries. In other words, life will go on, with much remaining the same.”

Time will tell.

President Hakainde Hichilema attended the 23rd COMESA Heads of State and Government Summit in Bujumbura and handed over the Chairmanship of the COMESA Authority to President Évariste Ndayishimiye of Burundi. The summit, held under the theme, “Accelerating Regional Integration through the Development of Regional Value Chains in Climate Resilient Agriculture, Mining, and Tourism,” saw a renewed commitment to fostering regional economic integration among member states.

President Hichilema highlighted the importance of increasing intra-COMESA trade, which currently stands at a low 12%. He emphasized that Zambia, as outgoing Chair, remains committed to strengthening the regional bloc by supporting agricultural research and productivity initiatives. Notably, under Zambia’s leadership, COMESA’s total export value to the global market saw a significant increase of 210%, from $100 billion in 2020 to $219 billion in 2023.

On the sidelines of the summit, President Hichilema held bilateral meetings with President William Ruto of Kenya and HE Taye Atske Selassie of Ethiopia. These discussions focused on shared interests and strengthening regional cooperation. President Hichilema also took the opportunity to introduce Dr. Samuel Maimbo, Zambia’s candidate for the African Development Bank presidency, expressing gratitude for the support from African leaders. In reciprocity, Zambia pledged its support for former Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga as the AU Commission Chairperson.

Returning from the summit, President Hichilema reaffirmed Zambia’s commitment to regional integration as part of the nation’s economic strategy. “Our goal is to make Zambia a land-linked nation, leveraging our strategic position to enhance trade and connectivity,” he stated.

With Burundi now chairing COMESA, and Kenya serving as deputy, Zambia will continue to play a pivotal role as an outgoing member of the COMESA Bureau, supporting the goals and initiatives of the regional organization.