It has been two years since I noticed that there was definitely something wrong with Meimouna. She has been our neighbor for about seven years, living three blocs away from my parents’ house. Ever since I knew her, many things have happened to us and to the country. Meimona broke up with her husband the same day the country broke up with TAYA ) (lol). I remember standing confused not able to tell my feelings. I was in the cloud nine about the news of tanks rolling around the streets of NKTT in what appeared to be a bloodless coup against the vicious dictator. This euphoria was marred by the sad face of my mother telling me that Meimouna is divorced. Although our relationship never got beyond formal and quick exchange of Salamoualeikoum, her frequent visits to the family and her shy and conservative manner made her one of those women who are likely to win your respect easily and then your affection. So, always with a head-down attitude when saying hello, she gained my respect and admiration as I started to see her as a member of the family. Small wonder then that the news of her divorce overshadowed my excitement about and celebration of Taya’s departure.
Now it has been two years since Mauritania conducted her course without Taya and Meimouna faced her fate without her husband. What became of the country is what I’ve been trying to tell you since I launched the blog. What became of Meimouna is another story, which I’ll try to tell you today.
But first, why the feeling that there’s something wrong about Meimouna?
I was walking through the corridor which lead to the living room, when I saw my mother with other women. They were talking, laughing and drinking tea. This is a familiar sight which I used to meet with a hasty hello, hurrying my way to the living room at the end of the hallway. Not now! There was Meimouna among these women, looking like nothing I’ would have expected. I was stunned when she looked at me straight in the face and asked half-speaking and half-laughing if I still know her “matleit taarafna”. I have faced this not- quite-innocent question many times and had answered it in a variety of ways, but from her it came as a shock which rendered me speechless. She was there, ten years younger than her age, confident, defiant, well dressed and casting her net wide on me. With the heavy make-up, the expensive mobile she kept brandishing and the French perfume filling the air, Meimouna fitted not in my image of a mother of five who had been left to the vagaries of the cold world after her husband abandoned her. Back to consciousness, I heard her answering a question from one of the women “hamda el moulana elli ouveit menou, houa ‘el ai eeg”.
With this note of relief and freedom from Meimouna in mind, I started to ask whether divorce is a curse or a blessing and if divorced women in our society have any regrets at all about losing the sacred bond of marital commitment and partnership. Whether a woman in our rapidly changing society has anything to loose from divorce. And If her loss, if any, is comparable to her gain.
We are probably the only society on earth which celebrates divorce and allows divorced men and women a clean bill of health when they try to marry again, and again. I'm sure the scene of divorced women being cheerlead in fancy procession cars to their parents is a sight too common for us to beg contemplation. We don't even ask whether it's a wedding or a break-up celebration, we have become so used to it that we are no more excited by the event of marriage than we're saddened by the eventuality of divorce. And by the same token that marriage has been stripped of its moral and emotional significance as a mutual partnership for life, divorce also has been purged of all its negative connotations.
We all know that divorce is the sad end of a failed marriage. In some other social contexts, divorce offers an important second chance in life for couples who couldn't get along together anymore as wife and husband. It's a chance given by society to start over without absolving the couples of their social responsibility toward the children. Society, through mechanism of behavior control, like courts and others, makes sure that we don't tamper with the value of the family which is the basis of society and the sole guarantee of its continuity. This is why state institutions, law, religion, etc are part of a network of moral vehicles cultivated and used by society to make sure that marriage is respected and that divorce is discredited. In some societies, divorced husbands can't afford to make ends meet because ninety percent of their income goes to the children. So after divorce, they find themselves confined to a life of celibacy till this end. These may be extreme measures, but they show how much societies want to preserve themselves and their continuity by making marriage sacred and by protecting the family.
I'm no Dr. Phil (lol) but this is the truth, if a society fails to monitor the behavior of individuals, the result will be a sate of anarchy where anything goes. And the laws against divorce and the social stigma attached to it worldwide are just an expression of this collective will to avoid a life of chaos and lawlessness.
But do Mauritanians think twice before they embark upon "abkadou al halai"? The answer is no. In fact they don't think at all when they take the decision. Everyone of you has certainly a member of the family who has divorced his wife, remarried and divorced her again for no reason at all. Some of you also may have close relatives who were obliged to use a third party to marry his wife , divorced for the third time, before he can claim her back "ala sounati allahi wa rassouli " (lol). If you try to figure out why both sexes are quick to resort to divorce as a handy solution for their problems, you'll be amazed to find out there need be no reason at all. Divorced men and women in our society are just relishing their rights granted to them by a culture which gives precedence to divorce over marriage. We're a society of divorcees because ours is a culture of divorce. Full stop. This explains how divorce doesn't have to do with the social background, regional origin, professional success or level of education. In Nouakchott, we're all actual or potential second-hand husbands and wives. It's amazing that as much as you're jealous, fellow Mauritanian, you don't realize that your wife today will be someone else's wife tomorrow after you would have abandoned her. So, on a deeper level of observation, we're not only a nation of divorcees but also of cuckolds (lol). Poor Mauritanians!
This may explain a bit why my neighbor looked jubilant and rebranded after the poor "garay" left her. From a wretched mother of five who bore the brunt of NKTT's life every day, she becomes now the owner of a two-story house which people started to use as an address to tell their way in the maze of our neighborhood. Last night, I had an encounter with her. I was driving past her gorgeous villa when she shouted my name asking me to pull over. She came along with a group of women whom I haven't seen in the neighborhood before and can tell form their dress, cigarettes and easy going manner they don't dwell here. She didn't say anything particular but her attitude spoke volumes.
As I started the engine, a thought crossed my mind that maybe life in our society is about attitudes. The thought kept running through my mind that if society gave Meimouna no third choice between being married and heart-broken and being divorced and happy, the blame is not hers alone if she chooses to be happy. The blame is on our culture of divorce.
mom
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Monday, July 2, 2007
The Future Of The Country Still In The Balance After Two Months of Sidioca’s Rule
The 3rd of August 2005 could have been just another day in the tumultuous history of this struggling nation at the tip of the Sahara, had it meant nothing more than just another power struggle among the ruling military elite which had ruled over the country for the last three decades. Luckily for us it hadn’t. The junta which toppled the authoritarian regime of Taya pledged to put the country back on track and hand power over to an elected civilian government, winning a wary and skeptical international community and a reluctant albeit sympathetic national opinion. The new leaders went even further by taking tangible measures towards achieving these goals and involving world and national players in the processes and policies aimed at setting the groundwork for real change in the country. The military was able to ride out the storm it created by picking up the right issues and making the right promises which matter internationally and domestically, building trust and bolstering its legitimacy. It promised a new era of democracy and transparency to counter international worries about the possible instability in the country and its spill over on regional peace. It goes without saying that the last thing the US and Europe would want is the prospect of another failed state which will easily fall for al-Qaida branches already active and operating in the region as well as being a safe passage for illegal immigration and drugs trafficking. By defending its case on a democratic platform the military succeeded not only in allaying fears about its being a force of instability but also in painting itself as promoting a democratic model which could be replicated in the rest of the Arab world.
Courting the favor of the national opinion on the other hand was by far an easier ride. The population which has lost hope for the future was waiting in the wings to see the back of Taya. So when the time came and Taya was overthrown peacefully in a bloodless coup, Mauritanians were ready to close ranks around the new crop of leaders and express support for them. The following democratic pledge was for many a foregone denouement of a national awakening story that kicked off with the fall of the dictator. This alone accounts for the national consensus which marked the two-year-long transition and the willingness to condone the at-times grievous blunders committed by the CMJD and the civil government. Dissent was viewed with mistrust as everybody was keen to make the transition smooth and successful, even though success has meant on many occasions turning a blind eye to pitfalls in the run up to the elections and the transfer of power. It appeared as if there was a tacit trade off between the general public and the CMJD whereby the latter relinquishes power and can get away with its mistakes in return, a win-win deal which both sides have honored.
The question on everyone’s mind now is whether the newly elected government will be able to follow in the lead of the CMJD, drumming international and domestic support for its democratic pledges, without delivering on the urgent issues of genuine reform. Although the answer is clearly “no”, the government looks set to make a repeat of the transition’s recipe of failure, mindless that the consequences of failure this time will be grievous and far reaching.
Indeed Sidiocazz may miscalculate that political openness alone will tip the scales in their favor, sparing them the trouble of combating rampant corruption and effecting a tangible improvement in the standards of living. This strategy which helped the CMJD steer clear of troubles would only plunge the current leadership into more crises, as more and more people are fed up with the democratic talk without any change in their lives.
The enduring culture of corruption can not be reversed with the traditional brand of administrators in charge. A new and clean generation of administrators has to take matters in hand and restore credibility to the public administration and the state. This belief, shared by the opposition as well as the ruling majority, was behind the president's choice of a new-look government line-up which boasts of featuring none of those close to the former regime. But this move, intended to send a potent message about the president's will for change, soon backfired. Made up of mostly novice low-profile administrators, the new government couldn't catch up with the daunting challenges facing it. To make matters worse, the new government was not only lacking in terms of experience but also had no plan to deal with various crisis which rocked it from day one. Right after it assumed authority, the Pandora's box of water and power shortages and prices increase broke open. Shanty districts, and even some up-market neighborhoods, of the capital suffered a severe water crisis which lasted for a month. Water shortage, which can be chalked up to a variety of reasons chief among which are the absence of long-term national policy of water and dysfunction of corruption infested Sonelck, was left to take its toll on the residents of Nouakchott as government officials remained in denial about the crisis. The same goes for the recurrent blackouts which hit Nouackchott almost daily. The new government was not only confused and incompetent but also showed it had not let go of obsolete practices of authoritarian regime. What we have seen is a bunch of ministers whose primary concern is to defend the sanctity of the state instead of facing the crises gripping the country head on, leading to the conviction that the government has undergone a change in style but not in substance.
So people's hopes for far-reaching reform are dashed by the government's failure to reinvent itself as a force spearheading change, stoking fears that the prospects of uprooting corruption in the public administration are still out of reach. This bleak outlook is further consolidated by a host of other measures which belie the new leadership's ambivalence about a complete break with the past. Every now and then new appointments to sensitive positions in the administration are announced, benefiting prominent members of the former regime. These appointments include the key positions of general secretaries of ministries, diplomatic sector and other facets of the administration. The aim behind this dangerous policy is two fold: to secure popular support by appointing a new breed of ministers, though inefficient ones, and bring the old generation through the back door and let them run the show. This is the least that can be said about an administration which allows a strong come back of Taya's cronies like Mohamed Vall Ould Ballal and Sidi Mohamed Ould Bubakar, among many others.
The president and his PM could have enjoyed the benefit of the doubt had it been a question of failing to have the right picks for the ministerial portfolios. People could always understand that twenty one years of methodic corruption under Taya made it extremely difficult to find picks with the double merit of being clean and competent. But what they couldn't understand is the leadership's open door policy toward including the remnants of the former regime in the running of the country. At a time hopes are at a high about the government adopting a zero-tolerance stance vis a vis corruption, the public opinion is shocked by what appears to be a premeditated plan to hold the country ransom one again to the corrupt class of the old regime. The appointment of one of the president's family members to the key post of deputy governor of the central bank is only another case of corruption which does not help refurbish the damaged image of this government.
The outcome of the last polls was very revealing about the choice of Mauritanians and offered a good lesson for next leadership. The fact that the results of the ballot was decided in a second round with a very narrow win by the incumbent is indicative that the consensus which marked the transition is over. It highlighted a divided community which is not speaking with one voice about who would be its next leader. Sidioca's lesson would have been to crack down on corruption and pursue reform aggressively in order to unite the nation behind him. What he did is the opposite. He took public support for granted, unaware that he can not enjoy the impunity of the CMJD because circumstances as well as expectations have changed. People rallied behind the CMJD because they relieved the country of Taya but most importantly because people wanted the military to go after their mandate is over. With Sidioca it is the other way around. People believe they have given him power and they are itching for their due. So "deliver" is the name for their bond with the president, who still has a lot of catching up to do to grasp this new reality.
mom
Courting the favor of the national opinion on the other hand was by far an easier ride. The population which has lost hope for the future was waiting in the wings to see the back of Taya. So when the time came and Taya was overthrown peacefully in a bloodless coup, Mauritanians were ready to close ranks around the new crop of leaders and express support for them. The following democratic pledge was for many a foregone denouement of a national awakening story that kicked off with the fall of the dictator. This alone accounts for the national consensus which marked the two-year-long transition and the willingness to condone the at-times grievous blunders committed by the CMJD and the civil government. Dissent was viewed with mistrust as everybody was keen to make the transition smooth and successful, even though success has meant on many occasions turning a blind eye to pitfalls in the run up to the elections and the transfer of power. It appeared as if there was a tacit trade off between the general public and the CMJD whereby the latter relinquishes power and can get away with its mistakes in return, a win-win deal which both sides have honored.
The question on everyone’s mind now is whether the newly elected government will be able to follow in the lead of the CMJD, drumming international and domestic support for its democratic pledges, without delivering on the urgent issues of genuine reform. Although the answer is clearly “no”, the government looks set to make a repeat of the transition’s recipe of failure, mindless that the consequences of failure this time will be grievous and far reaching.
Indeed Sidiocazz may miscalculate that political openness alone will tip the scales in their favor, sparing them the trouble of combating rampant corruption and effecting a tangible improvement in the standards of living. This strategy which helped the CMJD steer clear of troubles would only plunge the current leadership into more crises, as more and more people are fed up with the democratic talk without any change in their lives.
The enduring culture of corruption can not be reversed with the traditional brand of administrators in charge. A new and clean generation of administrators has to take matters in hand and restore credibility to the public administration and the state. This belief, shared by the opposition as well as the ruling majority, was behind the president's choice of a new-look government line-up which boasts of featuring none of those close to the former regime. But this move, intended to send a potent message about the president's will for change, soon backfired. Made up of mostly novice low-profile administrators, the new government couldn't catch up with the daunting challenges facing it. To make matters worse, the new government was not only lacking in terms of experience but also had no plan to deal with various crisis which rocked it from day one. Right after it assumed authority, the Pandora's box of water and power shortages and prices increase broke open. Shanty districts, and even some up-market neighborhoods, of the capital suffered a severe water crisis which lasted for a month. Water shortage, which can be chalked up to a variety of reasons chief among which are the absence of long-term national policy of water and dysfunction of corruption infested Sonelck, was left to take its toll on the residents of Nouakchott as government officials remained in denial about the crisis. The same goes for the recurrent blackouts which hit Nouackchott almost daily. The new government was not only confused and incompetent but also showed it had not let go of obsolete practices of authoritarian regime. What we have seen is a bunch of ministers whose primary concern is to defend the sanctity of the state instead of facing the crises gripping the country head on, leading to the conviction that the government has undergone a change in style but not in substance.
So people's hopes for far-reaching reform are dashed by the government's failure to reinvent itself as a force spearheading change, stoking fears that the prospects of uprooting corruption in the public administration are still out of reach. This bleak outlook is further consolidated by a host of other measures which belie the new leadership's ambivalence about a complete break with the past. Every now and then new appointments to sensitive positions in the administration are announced, benefiting prominent members of the former regime. These appointments include the key positions of general secretaries of ministries, diplomatic sector and other facets of the administration. The aim behind this dangerous policy is two fold: to secure popular support by appointing a new breed of ministers, though inefficient ones, and bring the old generation through the back door and let them run the show. This is the least that can be said about an administration which allows a strong come back of Taya's cronies like Mohamed Vall Ould Ballal and Sidi Mohamed Ould Bubakar, among many others.
The president and his PM could have enjoyed the benefit of the doubt had it been a question of failing to have the right picks for the ministerial portfolios. People could always understand that twenty one years of methodic corruption under Taya made it extremely difficult to find picks with the double merit of being clean and competent. But what they couldn't understand is the leadership's open door policy toward including the remnants of the former regime in the running of the country. At a time hopes are at a high about the government adopting a zero-tolerance stance vis a vis corruption, the public opinion is shocked by what appears to be a premeditated plan to hold the country ransom one again to the corrupt class of the old regime. The appointment of one of the president's family members to the key post of deputy governor of the central bank is only another case of corruption which does not help refurbish the damaged image of this government.
The outcome of the last polls was very revealing about the choice of Mauritanians and offered a good lesson for next leadership. The fact that the results of the ballot was decided in a second round with a very narrow win by the incumbent is indicative that the consensus which marked the transition is over. It highlighted a divided community which is not speaking with one voice about who would be its next leader. Sidioca's lesson would have been to crack down on corruption and pursue reform aggressively in order to unite the nation behind him. What he did is the opposite. He took public support for granted, unaware that he can not enjoy the impunity of the CMJD because circumstances as well as expectations have changed. People rallied behind the CMJD because they relieved the country of Taya but most importantly because people wanted the military to go after their mandate is over. With Sidioca it is the other way around. People believe they have given him power and they are itching for their due. So "deliver" is the name for their bond with the president, who still has a lot of catching up to do to grasp this new reality.
mom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)