part in the old horrors. He tried to wriggle out of it, claiming shamelessly that everyone was equally at fault for letting Macias get away with so much murder. âWho among us can blame others for the errors of the dictatorship ⦠we were all collaborators of dictatorship, all guilty,â he stated later. But Obiang was Maciasâs âleading acolyteâ and the ânumber two manâ in the country, to use thewords of one expert. He could be blamed. Some alledged that he supervised the most sadistic interrogation, torture and murder of prisoners in Black Beach. He saw that Maciasâs punishments were carried out. Forsyth rightly described him as the âinflicter of many horrors of his uncleâ. Replacing one despot with another made only a limited difference.
Obiang did, however, turn to western countries for help, dropping Chinese and Cuban advisers. The old colonial power promptly provided aid and recognition. The king and queen of Spain visited Malabo just before Christmas 1979, when Obiang modestly requested: âWe ask Spain to make Equatorial Guinea the Switzerland of Africa.â While they sat down to a banquet, people rioted outside for a share of a delivery of food parcels. Paranoia continued, but the government spread less terror; rulers ignored the law, but a new constitution was enacted; there were limited economic and political reforms. The small economy, after many years of stagnation, eventually grew: in the best of times the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) expanded by astonishing rates, such as 60 per cent a year by the end of the 1990s when oil exports boomed. Some gave Obiang grudging credit. An African ambassador in Malabo once concluded that âObiang is twenty years ahead of any of his ministersâ, though he added, âThe trouble is, heâs twenty years behind the rest of us.â
But these were limited virtues. Obiang looks moderate only when compared with his monstrous predecessor. By 2004, after a quarter century in power, most commentators ranked him as one of the worst leaders anywhere in the world. A British lawyer who is well paid to fight for Obiangâs rights later said airily that ordinary people do not need money or good government to be happy. Sitting in a plush district of Paris in 2005, he claimed that Equatorial Guineans were âhappy pluckingbananas from treesâ. âThey all seem to be smiling,â he noted smugly after a trip there. Perhaps that attitude explains why the government does almost nothing for its desperate citizens. On average, by 2005, each Equatorial Guinean should have been receiving roughly $6,000 a year, an income higher than Poles or Chileans enjoy. But none of this wealth is actually shared out. In 2002 Equatorial Guinea spent the least of any country, bar Iraq, on health (a wretched 1.8 per cent of GDP). No country anywhere spends less on education (a mere 0.5 per cent of GDP). An Equatorial Guinean can expect to live no more than fifty years.
Obiang frequently sounds like a lesser version of Macias. He is known in public as the âFather Behind the Gatesâ. A fawning aide on a radio programme in July 2003 called him âthe countryâs Godâ, who âcan decide to kill anyone without being called to account and without going to hell because it is God himself, with whom he is in permanent contact, and who gives him this strengthâ. He is not as violent as his uncle, but the catalogue of murder and torture in his prisons, police stations and elsewhere is toe-curling. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch frequently report on extrajudicial executions, torture and rape by police and soldiers; jurists from the International Bar Association throw their wigs up in horror at the rotten legal system, suggesting torture is common and few in power respect the rule of law. A British judge in April 2005 described Obiang as âa despot, [who rules] without regard to the rule of law, or
Obiang did, however, turn to western countries for help, dropping Chinese and Cuban advisers. The old colonial power promptly provided aid and recognition. The king and queen of Spain visited Malabo just before Christmas 1979, when Obiang modestly requested: âWe ask Spain to make Equatorial Guinea the Switzerland of Africa.â While they sat down to a banquet, people rioted outside for a share of a delivery of food parcels. Paranoia continued, but the government spread less terror; rulers ignored the law, but a new constitution was enacted; there were limited economic and political reforms. The small economy, after many years of stagnation, eventually grew: in the best of times the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) expanded by astonishing rates, such as 60 per cent a year by the end of the 1990s when oil exports boomed. Some gave Obiang grudging credit. An African ambassador in Malabo once concluded that âObiang is twenty years ahead of any of his ministersâ, though he added, âThe trouble is, heâs twenty years behind the rest of us.â
But these were limited virtues. Obiang looks moderate only when compared with his monstrous predecessor. By 2004, after a quarter century in power, most commentators ranked him as one of the worst leaders anywhere in the world. A British lawyer who is well paid to fight for Obiangâs rights later said airily that ordinary people do not need money or good government to be happy. Sitting in a plush district of Paris in 2005, he claimed that Equatorial Guineans were âhappy pluckingbananas from treesâ. âThey all seem to be smiling,â he noted smugly after a trip there. Perhaps that attitude explains why the government does almost nothing for its desperate citizens. On average, by 2005, each Equatorial Guinean should have been receiving roughly $6,000 a year, an income higher than Poles or Chileans enjoy. But none of this wealth is actually shared out. In 2002 Equatorial Guinea spent the least of any country, bar Iraq, on health (a wretched 1.8 per cent of GDP). No country anywhere spends less on education (a mere 0.5 per cent of GDP). An Equatorial Guinean can expect to live no more than fifty years.
Obiang frequently sounds like a lesser version of Macias. He is known in public as the âFather Behind the Gatesâ. A fawning aide on a radio programme in July 2003 called him âthe countryâs Godâ, who âcan decide to kill anyone without being called to account and without going to hell because it is God himself, with whom he is in permanent contact, and who gives him this strengthâ. He is not as violent as his uncle, but the catalogue of murder and torture in his prisons, police stations and elsewhere is toe-curling. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch frequently report on extrajudicial executions, torture and rape by police and soldiers; jurists from the International Bar Association throw their wigs up in horror at the rotten legal system, suggesting torture is common and few in power respect the rule of law. A British judge in April 2005 described Obiang as âa despot, [who rules] without regard to the rule of law, or
Similar Books
