| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 16:16:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by ebou4th
How about this!
Can we in the Diaspora agree to back the idea of a United Opposition that will determine its flag bearer through primaries? If we agree on this idea then why not form a group that will sell this idea. All we need is a couple of dedicated progressive Gambians who are willing to put the interest of the country before party affiliation. If we can forge this group I guarantee you other will follow.
Brother Nyarikangbanna I would thank you for your tireless effort in this forum. What do you think about my suggession? Will you sign on this idea? How about you sister Kobo? Who else thinks this will work?
If anyone has a better suggestions please put it forward.
Given that Party led alliance is the only form of coalition subsisting in law, will you then agree with me that an alliance reminiscent of the UDP/NRP/GPDP Alliance is the only way forward and that efforts should now be made to group all opposition forces in that sort of grouping?
Ebou, I once asked you this [above] question but you failed to answer. Let us not make a short cut here because it will take us nowhere. There is a big hurdle to climb if your dream of opposition unity is to be realized. Under what form of umbrella are we coming together? The NADD formula or anything akin to it is simply untenable. It does not subsist in law and has a great potential of annihilating contracting parties. Minute parties like NDAM can afford to disappear because they have never make a mark on the Gambia's political landscape but for a party like UDP or NRP to be susceptible to the same fate is too dangerous for our democracy. That is why we need to be bold enough to accept realities on the ground especially in terms of variance of support base between the opposition parties. No coalition, anywhere in the world, have succeeded without taking cognisance of such factors, and it is not any excuse to say 'yeah no single party can defeat Jammeh' because no coalition without the natural leadership of the UDP with a support base of over 75% of the opposition electoral population, can also defeat Jammeh. It is a fact no matter what anybody says.
You can now answer this question and I will tell you whether this suggestion is feasible or otherwise. If you choose to shy away from the question then you might as well concentrate on doing something else.
Thanks
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 23 Feb 2007 17:40:57 |
 |
|
|
ebou4th
USA
106 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 17:21:01
|
Nyarikangbanna, I agree with you that only a party led alliane will work and it is evident that UDP is the leading opposition party. But I believe that the people should be given the opportunity to choose a flag bearer. The primaries will open the field and give an opportunity for a new breed to emerge.
Pardon the elementary nature of my question, did the people choose the flag bearer of the UDP/NRP/GPDP alliance?
Why do you believe that the NADD formula or anything akin to it is simply untenable? If the NAAD formula will work what do you propose?
|
“Revolutions are brought about by men, by men who think as men of action and act as men of thought.”
Kwame Nkrumah
|
|
|
|
ebou4th
USA
106 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 17:21:01
|
Nyarikangbanna, I agree with you that only a party led alliane will work and it is evident that UDP is the leading opposition party. But I believe that the people should be given the opportunity to choose a flag bearer. The primaries will open the field and give an opportunity for a new breed to emerge.
Pardon the elementary nature of my question, did the people choose the flag bearer of the UDP/NRP/GPDP alliance?
Why do you believe that the NADD formula or anything akin to it is simply untenable? If the NAAD formula will work what do you propose?
|
“Revolutions are brought about by men, by men who think as men of action and act as men of thought.”
Kwame Nkrumah
|
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 17:31:47
|
Ebou, your questions are legitimate and you should not have seek my pardon.
Question 1 Pardon the elementary nature of my question, did the people choose the flag bearer of the UDP/NRP/GPDP alliance?
Answer = Yes and unanimously at a Party conference in Brikama.
QUESTION 2 Why do you think NADD formula and anything akin to it is untenable?
Answer= Please refer back to original posting
Thanks for your timely response anyway and for accepting the status of the UDP as a giant in opposition politics in the Gambia. I shall proceed with the issue of primary election later.
Cheer
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 23 Feb 2007 17:38:04 |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 17:31:47
|
Ebou, your questions are legitimate and you should not have seek my pardon.
Question 1 Pardon the elementary nature of my question, did the people choose the flag bearer of the UDP/NRP/GPDP alliance?
Answer = Yes and unanimously at a Party conference in Brikama.
QUESTION 2 Why do you think NADD formula and anything akin to it is untenable?
Answer= Please refer back to original posting
Thanks for your timely response anyway and for accepting the status of the UDP as a giant in opposition politics in the Gambia. I shall proceed with the issue of primary election later.
Cheer
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 23 Feb 2007 17:38:04 |
|
|
|
sidibeh
Sweden
10 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 18:17:55
|
Hi Everyone,
I must first of all admit how humbled I am by the overwhelming response the article "Why NADD Broke Down" has generated. I was not registered on this forum when it was posted here; and it is only during the past hour that I managed to read all of the responses to the article.
As mentioned earlier I have edited the article, correcting a load of grammatical errors, and it will be available in pdf format eventually.
As it was just as fitting, I mentioned that there obviously were loopholes in my narrative, and so I am pleased that so much more has been revealed in the process, hopefully benefitting all of us.
My interest has been particularly captured by Janyanfara's posting, which seemed to have taken us all back to school reminding us of how Gambian politics really works on the ground: the constant migration of local chiefs from one allegiance to the next, and in that process, altering at will voter sentiments.
I also agree with Baldeh and many others that while a rigorous exchange is important, we should eventually focus on how to bring about genuine reconciliation. What we all want is a better Gambia.
Once again many thanks for the tremendous interest you all have shown.
Sincerely,
Momodou S Sidibeh |
|
|
|
sidibeh
Sweden
10 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 18:17:55
|
Hi Everyone,
I must first of all admit how humbled I am by the overwhelming response the article "Why NADD Broke Down" has generated. I was not registered on this forum when it was posted here; and it is only during the past hour that I managed to read all of the responses to the article.
As mentioned earlier I have edited the article, correcting a load of grammatical errors, and it will be available in pdf format eventually.
As it was just as fitting, I mentioned that there obviously were loopholes in my narrative, and so I am pleased that so much more has been revealed in the process, hopefully benefitting all of us.
My interest has been particularly captured by Janyanfara's posting, which seemed to have taken us all back to school reminding us of how Gambian politics really works on the ground: the constant migration of local chiefs from one allegiance to the next, and in that process, altering at will voter sentiments.
I also agree with Baldeh and many others that while a rigorous exchange is important, we should eventually focus on how to bring about genuine reconciliation. What we all want is a better Gambia.
Once again many thanks for the tremendous interest you all have shown.
Sincerely,
Momodou S Sidibeh |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 21:05:44
|
Sidibeh, Ebou, my long time rival Nyarikangbanna, and all other contributors, the discussions are commendable and encouraging. Ultimately we have a common interest which is Gambia and Gambia alone. Once we all put this fact in the forefront, we can always come to a compromise. We don't have to have a consensus to help shape the destiny of our nation. In fact in a democratic process, there is nothing like consensus. There will always be opposing views depending on the circumstances and parties involved.
Some people continues to echo the issue of party lead coalition as the only option which I don't necessarily subscribe to in the format Nyarikang and others want it to be. We can have a party lead coalition, but the leading party must be more inclusive, reformative and be prepared for a fundamental system change rather than personnel change. Change of personnel at the state house is not the issue since we have had changes and it did not work because the structures of viable democracy and economic progress are not in place.
Currently as our opposition parties are structured a party lead coalition will only continue to divide our country simply because one party's agenda will be at the forefront instead of addressing and recognizing the existence of others regardless of their size.
Let me be more clear here, we all know that the power struggle and personality conflict between the opposition leaders and their supporters is a clear recipe for another disasterous failure should we forge a loose coalition without clearly spelling out who is responsible for what. The stakes are so high that any party lead coalition must take into consideration the role each party play in the coalition. The agenda must be a Gambian agenda and one that embraces the structures of a National Unity Government and not one with a party agenda as it is being advocated now.
I will dwell more on this topic but for now I want to hear from what others have to say... |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 21:05:44
|
Sidibeh, Ebou, my long time rival Nyarikangbanna, and all other contributors, the discussions are commendable and encouraging. Ultimately we have a common interest which is Gambia and Gambia alone. Once we all put this fact in the forefront, we can always come to a compromise. We don't have to have a consensus to help shape the destiny of our nation. In fact in a democratic process, there is nothing like consensus. There will always be opposing views depending on the circumstances and parties involved.
Some people continues to echo the issue of party lead coalition as the only option which I don't necessarily subscribe to in the format Nyarikang and others want it to be. We can have a party lead coalition, but the leading party must be more inclusive, reformative and be prepared for a fundamental system change rather than personnel change. Change of personnel at the state house is not the issue since we have had changes and it did not work because the structures of viable democracy and economic progress are not in place.
Currently as our opposition parties are structured a party lead coalition will only continue to divide our country simply because one party's agenda will be at the forefront instead of addressing and recognizing the existence of others regardless of their size.
Let me be more clear here, we all know that the power struggle and personality conflict between the opposition leaders and their supporters is a clear recipe for another disasterous failure should we forge a loose coalition without clearly spelling out who is responsible for what. The stakes are so high that any party lead coalition must take into consideration the role each party play in the coalition. The agenda must be a Gambian agenda and one that embraces the structures of a National Unity Government and not one with a party agenda as it is being advocated now.
I will dwell more on this topic but for now I want to hear from what others have to say... |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
BambaLaye
USA
100 Posts |
|
|
BambaLaye
USA
100 Posts |
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 21:53:10
|
| Bambalaye, you would never cease to get amazed by the intellectual hypocricy among Gambians. You just could not have said it more. The fact that the NADD MOU was like an apposition bible that none of these super intellectuals was willing or should i say honest enough to critic durring the hey days of NADD and remained critic free right through the leadership tussle and even in the aftermath of the breakdown of the original NADD tells a very serious story about gambian intellectuals. Like you rightly said, just where hell were these people when you need them? If the NADD MOU was full of flaws as they like us to believe why were they not forthright with the "truth" or offer solution and remedies at the right time. Do they have to wait until the oppossition score a dismal result in the last elections before they throw in their "hamon na ko"(i knew it). When the hell did you knew? Why did you not tell us then? If you were too wimpish of carrying the burden or responsibility of highlighting the flaws of NADD at its inception i honestly don't see any reason why anyone should start to hum "hamon na ko" now. |
|
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2007 : 21:53:10
|
| Bambalaye, you would never cease to get amazed by the intellectual hypocricy among Gambians. You just could not have said it more. The fact that the NADD MOU was like an apposition bible that none of these super intellectuals was willing or should i say honest enough to critic durring the hey days of NADD and remained critic free right through the leadership tussle and even in the aftermath of the breakdown of the original NADD tells a very serious story about gambian intellectuals. Like you rightly said, just where hell were these people when you need them? If the NADD MOU was full of flaws as they like us to believe why were they not forthright with the "truth" or offer solution and remedies at the right time. Do they have to wait until the oppossition score a dismal result in the last elections before they throw in their "hamon na ko"(i knew it). When the hell did you knew? Why did you not tell us then? If you were too wimpish of carrying the burden or responsibility of highlighting the flaws of NADD at its inception i honestly don't see any reason why anyone should start to hum "hamon na ko" now. |
|
|
|
Bronx
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2007 : 05:40:42
|
Come people lets focus here. Pointing out the flaws in the MOU is part of the post election analysis. It has nothing to do with people saying "i knew it". In fact some people predicted on the post and the L (Ebou Jallow came to mind) that NADD will implode if they didn't work out certain issues. The majority of the readership piled on him. There was a time during the adrenaline rush that was NADD that any critic of the MOU is seen as a pessimist. We want it to succeed so bad that we made so fundamental mistakes along the way.
In order to avoid the pitfalls again, we have to delve into all the nuggets and see where we went wrong. It is not a "i knew it" paradigm, but a matter of self examination. |
|
|
|
Bronx
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2007 : 05:40:42
|
Come people lets focus here. Pointing out the flaws in the MOU is part of the post election analysis. It has nothing to do with people saying "i knew it". In fact some people predicted on the post and the L (Ebou Jallow came to mind) that NADD will implode if they didn't work out certain issues. The majority of the readership piled on him. There was a time during the adrenaline rush that was NADD that any critic of the MOU is seen as a pessimist. We want it to succeed so bad that we made so fundamental mistakes along the way.
In order to avoid the pitfalls again, we have to delve into all the nuggets and see where we went wrong. It is not a "i knew it" paradigm, but a matter of self examination. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
