Go Team USA! Dark horse Miss United States Of America Alexandria Mills walked away with the prized tiara at the 60th annual Miss World Pageant in the Chinese city Sanya on Saturday. The 18-year-old aspiring teacher from Kentucky wore a ravishing white gown as she beat out 114 contestants from across the Globe for the [...]
Posts Tagged ‘Botswana’
Joe Jonas vows to devote himself to charity work
American singer Joe Jonas has promised to devote himself to charity work following a life-changing humanitarian trip to Africa. The Jonas Brothers singer went to Botswana and he admitted that he was humbled by the experience. “I brought some of my best friends with me to be a part of this incredible experience. We were [...]
Richard Burton told Elizabeth Taylor: I’ll kill myself if you leave me
Elizabeth Taylor has made public a series of never-before-seen love letters she received from Richard Burton which gives new insight into their passionate but turbulent romance.
In the letters, Burton bared his soul, and even suggested committing suicide if she leaves him, saying he is infatuated and cannot live without her, reports The Telegraph.
“If you leave [...]
Know how Prince Harry and Prince William will Spend their Summer holidays
In just a couple of weeks, the handsome princes, Harry and William, will be out for their first overseas tour together.
The two young princes are bound to South Africa. Their tour starts from the 14th of June. However, the trip would only last for 5 days. On the 19th of June, the brothers will go [...]
While stocks last
Some ivory sales are a good idea. This one isn’t
IN 1989 the signatories to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) agreed to ban the ivory trade, and banned it has remained. Except, that is, for when CITES chooses to allow it—as it has done now and then since 1997, when specific countries have some well-sourced ivory to get rid of. Most recently, in 2008, South Africa, Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe were allowed to make such sales to China and Japan. Now, as the triennial CITES meeting gets under way in Doha, both Tanzania and Zambia say they want to do something similar.
Those in favour of such sales (most notably, the countries which seek to make them) say they allow countries to benefit from having elephants, and help to finance elephant conservation and protection. Those against them (some conservation charities and some academics in the field) argue that any sale of ivory will lead to an increase in poaching by stimulating demand, and that little of the money raised actually goes to elephants. …
Many pregnant African women avoid HIV screening
A large number of pregnant women in Uganda, Africa deliberately avoid being tested for HIV, increasing the risk of mother-to-child transmission, says a study.
In a new paper, researchers discussed how mother-to-child transmission of HIV can be easily and cost-effectively prevented using a short course of antiretroviral therapy.
However, this is effective only if the mother [...]
Outstripped
Africa needs to become much more competitive, if the continent is to prosper
Sub-Saharan Africa is tending to fall behind other regions in terms of competitiveness. Human capital deficiencies—whether in terms of education or health—infrastructure and high crime levels tend to be deterrents as far as investors are concerned.
Sub-Saharan economies have become more competitive in the past year, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF)’s Global Competitiveness Report, published on September 8th. Adjusted for the fact that there is one less country ranked in the 2009/2010 report, 13 of the 26 Sub-Saharan economies rated have improved their standing, while three are unchanged from last year and ten have slipped back. The greatest improvement by far is registered by Uganda, up 20 places at 108th (out of 133 overall), while Lesotho jumps 16 places and Tanzania 13. The worst African performers over the past 12 months have been Mali, down 13 places, Ghana (-12) and Botswana (-10). …
Jaime Pozuelo-Monfort: Diamonds Are Not Forever
Botswana is an example of how to wisely administer a natural resource endowment.
De Beers profits lose their gleam

Profits at De Beers, the world’s biggest diamond producer, have slumped in the "most difficult" economic environment in decades.
In the first six months of 2009, it made a profit of $3m (£1.8m), down from $316m a year earlier.
Diamonds may – as the song goes – be forever, but they have proved to be as vulnerable to the recession as other, less enduring, consumer goods.
Demand is weak in the US, but many in China and India are still buying gems.
Production cut
As consumers have conserved their cash for more mundane expenditures, De Beers has cut its production.
In the first six months of this year, production was 73% lower than last year at 6.6 million carats – the weight of a diamond is expressed in carats, with one carat equivalent to 0.2 grams.
De Beers will produce roughly half the amount of carats in 2009 that it did in 2008.
Mines in South Africa, Canada, Botswana and Namibia have all taken production holidays as demand fell.
This has helped the company reduce inventories of rough diamonds in cutting centres by 30%. It has also shrunk its global workforce by 23%.

A future sparkle
While its profit statement may make gloomy reading, De Beers says it has reason for optimism. The rate of decline has slowed so the second half should be better, it said.
Diamond sales, it points out, typically do well after recessions. It pointed to "significant price growth seen in almost every recovery period dating back to the 1970s".
While diamond prices have fallen, there have been no major diamond discoveries in more than a decade, a fact which should support prices.
"We have had to make our prices fairly competitive to win the sales"
Joe Boll, JP Diamonds
"With worldwide reserves at an all-time low, diamonds will become more scarce," it said. "As demand grows in emerging markets, it is likely that sales will outpace forecast diamond supply for many years to come."
Hidden gems
But, as things stand, there is "still poor demand for diamond jewellery in major markets," wrote Des Kilalea, an industry analyst at RBC Capital Markets, in a research note earlier this week.
"Diamond jewellery sales in all markets but China and the Middle East remain under pressure. This trend is highlighted by poor department store revenues in the US (where 45% of all diamond jewellery is sold) with June’s sales down 10%, according to government figures, " he wrote.
For those with money to spare, now may be the time to get a bargain on the High Street.
People are still buying diamonds, said Joe Boll, owner of the UK’s JP Diamonds, but they are looking for a good deal.
"People are still buying, certainly engagement rings and eternity rings. People are buying a little more carefully, and looking to get a reasonable price," he said.
"Generally, we are probably 20% cheaper this year than last year. We have had to make our prices fairly competitive to win the sales. It has worked, our volumes are up, we have taken a little hit in margin."</p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.
Kim Kardashian almost got stranded in South Africa after misplacing passport
Kim Kardashian almost got stranded in South Africa after she misplaced her passport.
She is grateful to her NFL player beau Reggie Bush who was there to save the day.
“They wouldn”t let me out of customs line,” People magazine quoted her as telling about the ordeal after flying from Botswana to Johannesburg, South Africa. [...]
Kim Kardashian Lost Passport In Africa
INFphoto.com
Kim Kardashian was nearly stranded in the Motherland after she misplaced her passport during a flight between from Botswana and Johannesburg, South Africa on Wednesday.
The buxom brunette was detained at customs when she couldn’t produce the essential document upon her arrival in the South African capital.
“I left my passport on the plane!” she explains.
“They [...]
Send in the accountants
Many of Africa’s leaders will have been distressed to hear Obama’s message on aid conditions
Africa’s leaders have become accustomed to a protective stance of victimhood. They only need to say “neo-colonial” for world leaders to back off from criticism. And moats have made the problem worse: imagine the retort to a British politician complaining about African governance. Obama’s arrival in Africa was preceded by his spectacular apology to the Muslim world, so many African leaders must have been hoping for more of the absolving balm of western guilt. They did not get it. Instead, Obama delivered three unwelcome messages.
The most explosive was that Africa’s core problem is its own misgovernance: Africa’s persistent poverty has been largely self-inflicted. Obama is the first western leader to have the political space to deliver this tough but necessary message. He does not need a photo-op with smiling Africans to signal to voters back home that he is a compassionate sort of guy. Nor does he risk being denounced. His protection is in part that it is not possible to imagine Obama in a pith helmet; but beyond that, nobody can seriously question Obama’s sincere concern to help his father’s continent. His statement cannot be interpreted as being the preliminaries to neglect.
Second, the solution to misgovernance will come from within Africa: the key struggle is internal. By choosing to visit Ghana – which recently hosted an honest election, with the governing party narrowly losing – Obama flagged up that leadership depends critically on the integrity of the political process.
Obama has made a clarion call for change, but more importantly, he is the change. Africans see Obama as a fellow African, but unlike most of Africa’s own leaders he personifies the leadership values that he preaches. Poor leadership is not intrinsic to African leadership; it is intrinsic only to the people who have jostled their way into presidencies.
Why has the selection of African leadership been so disastrous? The problem lies not with Africans but with the structure of the polities in which they live. Around the world the chance of a stolen election soars if the society is poor, small, and resource-rich. Even then it is not inevitable: Botswana started with just these features yet it is a functioning democracy. But such countries need strong checks and balances such as a free press and what political scientists call “veto points” – independent bases of power that can block presidential decisions. The democratisation that swept across Africa after the fall of the Soviet Union in most cases amounted to little more than elections.
Which takes us to Obama’s final message: America will help, where it can, to tilt the balance towards brave people struggling for change. American money will be conditional upon decent governance. Where public money can be looted, the political class – no matter what its original composition – will end up peopled by crooks. In Africa aid is such a major component of public money that the scope for capture matters enormously.
To date America and Europe have chosen different mechanisms for aid: Europe has favoured budget support, in which the recipient government decides how the money is spent; America has preferred project aid, where the money is tied to a specific expenditure. In badly governed countries the effect has been the same: the money has been captured by politicians who are the core of the problem. Project aid only gives the illusion of integrity: governments get donors to finance the projects they would have done anyway, and this releases their own money for the presidential wish list. It is the wish list that project aid is really paying for.
The Obama principle provides the basis for a new, common approach. Where governance is satisfactory, as in Ghana, budget support is the only sensible basis for aid. Europe has it right: why should US politicians try to dictate to the Ghanaian government how to spend aid when Ghanaians are able to hold their government to account? At the other end of the governance spectrum neither budget support nor project aid can tackle the problem.
We can learn from Paddy Ashdown‘s experience in Bosnia. He concluded that what he had needed were not doctors without borders, but accountants without borders. Where governance is inadequate, aid should only come with an army of accountants able to ensure that it is not captured. The missing piece of international architecture is an independent assessment of the integrity of budget systems. Where a budget system was certified as satisfactory, Europe and America could safely converge on budget support. Where it was found unsatisfactory, aid would be conditional upon accountants. Governments would know that to get foreign accountants off their backs they need to build systems that withstand scrutiny. The rationale for cleaning up budgets is not that it would safeguard our money, but that it would clean up politics, and build on the distress that Obama’s speech will have caused Africa’s crooked politicians.




Send in the accountants
Many of Africa’s leaders will have been distressed to hear Obama’s message on aid conditions
Africa’s leaders have become accustomed to a protective stance of victimhood. They only need to say “neo-colonial” for world leaders to back off from criticism. And moats have made the problem worse: imagine the retort to a British politician complaining about African governance. Obama’s arrival in Africa was preceded by his spectacular apology to the Muslim world, so many African leaders must have been hoping for more of the absolving balm of western guilt. They did not get it. Instead, Obama delivered three unwelcome messages.
The most explosive was that Africa’s core problem is its own misgovernance: Africa’s persistent poverty has been largely self-inflicted. Obama is the first western leader to have the political space to deliver this tough but necessary message. He does not need a photo-op with smiling Africans to signal to voters back home that he is a compassionate sort of guy. Nor does he risk being denounced. His protection is in part that it is not possible to imagine Obama in a pith helmet; but beyond that, nobody can seriously question Obama’s sincere concern to help his father’s continent. His statement cannot be interpreted as being the preliminaries to neglect.
Second, the solution to misgovernance will come from within Africa: the key struggle is internal. By choosing to visit Ghana – which recently hosted an honest election, with the governing party narrowly losing – Obama flagged up that leadership depends critically on the integrity of the political process.
Obama has made a clarion call for change, but more importantly, he is the change. Africans see Obama as a fellow African, but unlike most of Africa’s own leaders he personifies the leadership values that he preaches. Poor leadership is not intrinsic to African leadership; it is intrinsic only to the people who have jostled their way into presidencies.
Why has the selection of African leadership been so disastrous? The problem lies not with Africans but with the structure of the polities in which they live. Around the world the chance of a stolen election soars if the society is poor, small, and resource-rich. Even then it is not inevitable: Botswana started with just these features yet it is a functioning democracy. But such countries need strong checks and balances such as a free press and what political scientists call “veto points” – independent bases of power that can block presidential decisions. The democratisation that swept across Africa after the fall of the Soviet Union in most cases amounted to little more than elections.
Which takes us to Obama’s final message: America will help, where it can, to tilt the balance towards brave people struggling for change. American money will be conditional upon decent governance. Where public money can be looted, the political class – no matter what its original composition – will end up peopled by crooks. In Africa aid is such a major component of public money that the scope for capture matters enormously.
To date America and Europe have chosen different mechanisms for aid: Europe has favoured budget support, in which the recipient government decides how the money is spent; America has preferred project aid, where the money is tied to a specific expenditure. In badly governed countries the effect has been the same: the money has been captured by politicians who are the core of the problem. Project aid only gives the illusion of integrity: governments get donors to finance the projects they would have done anyway, and this releases their own money for the presidential wish list. It is the wish list that project aid is really paying for.
The Obama principle provides the basis for a new, common approach. Where governance is satisfactory, as in Ghana, budget support is the only sensible basis for aid. Europe has it right: why should US politicians try to dictate to the Ghanaian government how to spend aid when Ghanaians are able to hold their government to account? At the other end of the governance spectrum neither budget support nor project aid can tackle the problem.
We can learn from Paddy Ashdown‘s experience in Bosnia. He concluded that what he had needed were not doctors without borders, but accountants without borders. Where governance is inadequate, aid should only come with an army of accountants able to ensure that it is not captured. The missing piece of international architecture is an independent assessment of the integrity of budget systems. Where a budget system was certified as satisfactory, Europe and America could safely converge on budget support. Where it was found unsatisfactory, aid would be conditional upon accountants. Governments would know that to get foreign accountants off their backs they need to build systems that withstand scrutiny. The rationale for cleaning up budgets is not that it would safeguard our money, but that it would clean up politics, and build on the distress that Obama’s speech will have caused Africa’s crooked politicians.