Nicholas Rainer
2 April 2008
Port Louis — The recent special report of the "Financial Times" on Mauritius amply gave credit where it is due. However, the challenges facing the country were given short shrift.
It's not everyday that a country gets a ten-page spread in the prestigious Financial Times (FT) in which the publication's journalists lavish it with superlatives. Then again, it's not everyday that a country, at the tender age of 40, can boast of having defied "doomsayers" of the ilk of James Edward Meade and V. S Naipaul, Nobel Prize laureates for economics and literature, respectively. The FT's Special Report published last month to coincide with Independence Day is as remarkable for its omissions as for its ego-boosting plaudits.
Fleet Street's finest expound enthusiastically on the enormous strides made by Mauritius, a country that was teetering on the brink of social and economic collapse not half a century ago.
This is not say that the nation doesn't deserve the compliments that the FT's informative report showers upon it. It's just that the challenges faced by country perhaps deserve more than just a glancing mention. Mauritius is indeed a success story but its continued prosperity hinges on more than a just "restructured" manufacturing sector, "liberal banking policy" and a tourist industry "anxious not to miss any opportunities".
The introductory article entitled "An island bridging Africa and Asia" waxes lyrical about the economic reforms"aimed at creating a new business model". "The government has faced fierce criticism from the opposition over the social cost of the Thatcherite reforms it has forced through", writes Alec Russell, the FT's Johannesburg Bureau Chief.
The "fierce criticism" is perhaps understandable given that Thatcherism is credited with widening the wealth gap in the United Kingdom to unprecedented levels as well as altering the social fabric. The fact that the adjective is employed in such a throwaway manner is very indicative. Surely the nature of these reforms and their implicit socio-economic ramifications are worthy of more than just a cursory mention.
Admittedly, it would be naïve to expect the FT to advocate anything short of unfettered economic liberalism. It caters to the power brokers of the City, men and women who perceive the world in terms of mergers, turnover and stock value. By focusing almost solely on economic issues though it is simply not doing the country justice.
Growing income disparities
In "A model of multi-cultural co-existence", the FT recognizes that the island's economic growth has not benefited all segments of the population. It states that "globalisation means yet more influences washing across the island and most are snapped up, particularly western consumer goods. But rapid economic change and the emergence of an elite nouveau riche has led to growing discomfort over income disparities" (...)
"There is also increased worry about crime, corruption and the loss of 'traditional' values. While this might be more symptomatic of economic insecurities than lasting negative changes, the government will face increased scrutiny as it aims for great equity and maintained unity."
Mauritius's rapprochement with China also gets an interesting article in which the Shanxi Tianli economic zone is evoked. The author of David v. Goliath - Mauritius facing up to China, Vinaye Dev Ancharaz, is quoted extensively. "We present to China an interesting set of incentives. It is no coincidence that China wants to come here. We offer distinct market advantages."
"While a supporter of the project, Prof Ancharaz cautions that too little attention has been paid to the potential environmental impact of the development in one of the most beautiful parts of the island. 'We are also quite silent about the socio-economic impact' , he says" the article goes on to explain. It would definitely have been worthwhile to elaborate on these points in order to better gauge the project's relative merits.
There is nary a mention of its Small Island Developing State (SIDS) status which, if anything, makes the country's economic success all the more impressive. Yet the vulnerability conferred by being a SIDS perhaps deserves at least a footnote from such a newspaper that prides itself on the thoroughness of its reporting.
Once again, the FT's raison d'être is not to inform on environmental issues, but the fact that the island's very existence depends on its ability to preserve its meager resources, could at the very least have been mentioned. The IRS projects that dot the island, for example, will not be viable if the country's beautiful looks are degraded by a lack of planning.
Mauritius looks at its best on pages 6 and 7. The former, entitled, Little bitterness in spite of the rhetoric, details the "rare example of African democratic alternation" while the latter is an interview of the Prime minister in which he states that there "has never been a Mauritian government more focused on the poor".
The Special Report would probably be more convincing if it had focused a little more on the poor and the vulnerable, and had not accepted everything at face value.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 L'Express. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
