Letter to the Editor - ‘We all want peace for our motherland’ |11 February 2015
I refer to the letter in your paper written by Mr James Mancham printed in your edition of Tuesday February 10, 2015. This was in response to an interview that I gave to TODAY in Seychelles, printed on Monday February 9, 2015.
Without wanting to go into a political ping-pong match with Mr Mancham, I somehow feel that I have to correct some factual mistakes he made in his letter while explaining certain issues for your readers to get a clearer picture of the whole situation.
The words in the interview that annoyed Mr Mancham were the following:
“TODAY in Seychelles: To what extent do you think the fact that Mr James Mancham’s support of James Michel helps the President?
Ramkalawan: I don’t think it does. Mr Mancham is not a very important factor in Seychelles’ politics today. He’s the past and when he comes close to the very people who overthrew him, he’s seen as a traitor. If things had been different and positive changes had come about on the political field because of what Mancham was doing, it would have been possibly good.”
Mr Mancham’s reply clearly confirms the point I was making. I was talking about politics in Seychelles TODAY. His letter is about the PAST. The truth is that he does not feature in the political debates and the Seychellois have stopped talking about him as being a determining factor in deciding for whom they will vote. Whether he is close to Mr Michel or not, no longer matters for the Seychellois workers who are struggling to make ends meet. Of course the truth hurts and probably this is why I ended up being bombarded with so many insults to the extent of asking me to become the new St. Francis of Assissi!
His letter proves the point because it only talks about the past. And this is exactly what I pointed out. That he was part of the past.
However, Mr Mancham, in trying to vent out his anger, probably as the statesman he wants to portray himself, made some factual mistakes.
1. He calls the first political grouping I headed ‘United Opposition’. I was never the leader of the United Opposition. It was Mrs Annette Georges who was the leader of that party, which brought under its wings, Parti Seselwa, National Alliance Party and Seychelles National Movement. The presidential candidate of the United Opposition at the first presidential election in 1993 was Mr Philippe Boullé
2. Mr Mancham forgets to mention that in the last presidential election that Mr René was candidate, he refused to join the other opposition forces, but instead insulted us by making his famous declaration of ‘Sorti lo lili pou tonm dan bake’! This was in return for him to get back the properties the government had acquired under René.
3. He mentions the fact that he joined with us and we nearly won the elections in 2006. This is true, but what he fails to tell your readers is that at midday on election day, he boarded Kenya Airways and left the country without informing us. The SBC covered his departure which was given prominence in the afternoon news and caused many people to vote for the ruling party in fear of violent repercussions should the SNP win. He caused us to lose the election by acting that way. He was the one who broke off that relationship. His presence was never a threat to my leadership because I had already defeated him in the presidential election of 1998. I guess by stating this he was merely giving himself importance, something he does very well!
4. Mr Mancham states that he initiated a ‘Seychelles First Movement’, and that I attended the first meeting at Eden Island, but refused to attend the second one. It is obvious that he is now lost even in his past. For his information, I NEVER attended any of his ‘Seychelles First’ meetings and secondly Eden Island was not even in existence then. Was the meeting held under the casuarina trees Mr. Mancham?
5. He then goes on to give a list of people, who according to him have left the SNP. Is this really the statesmanship Mr Mancham talks about and wants us to believe in? Politicians move from one party to another. I could easily ask him what happened to most people who were close to him when he was president, Mr Moulinié, Mr D’Offay, Mr Mondon, Mr Joubert, Mr Uzice, etc… Did they not leave his party for some reason. I could also ask the same question of many people who were in the SPUP/SPPF/PL as well. I don’t see why someone who wants us to see him as such a great statesman would even mention that.
6. He states that I should refuse the monetary benefits that I am receiving. I think this is too low to answer.
Editor, in his concluding paragraphs, Mr Mancham destroys all the arguments he presented in his letter by stating the following: “ Finally, I believe it is opportune for me to avail of this opportunity to once again emphasise that I have now for several years moved away from partisan politics to play the role of a statesman both locally and internationally.” Was this not what I stated in my answer?
As far as declaring that “I had the opportunity to get to know him better and to realise that he had the potential of becoming a dictator, three times more ruthless than those we have known”, I can only say to Mr Mancham that I wish he had developed his sense of clairvoyance back in 1977, because he would have known that he was about to be overthrown and betrayed by Mr René with that kiss at the airport. I can also add and say to him that when he shakes my hands, there is no blood on them, whereas the ones who are his closest friends today have the blood of the Seychellois on them. That’s the very same blood Archbishop Emeritus French Chang-Him keeps talking about and saying ‘too much blood have flowed in Seychelles soil’.
We all want a better Seychelles. We all want peace for our motherland.
Thank you for publishing my letter
Wavel Ramkalawan