The debate at hand has become as dynamic as the underlying political process that is the centre piece of this very debate. Dynamic in the sense that, it attracted attention of beneficiaries (Rwandans within and in diaspora) and various other stakeholders, who are now fully on board, and have voiced their concerns/position/ideas over the same, and these (judging by lots of emails I receive) have ranged from confusion at the beginning of the debate, to understanding of issues at stake. 

And whereas every Rwandans is entitled to their opinion as to the future which we need to shape as a country today, and especially for Rwandans coming after us; nevertheless, consensus seems to be emerging as issues at stake become clearer, and the dark horizon facing us, getting even darker when we factor in change in our tomorrow’s political dispensation.

Clearer Stakes

As argued earlier, no single country in the development history/literature has ever changed visionary leadership that is delivering, and is on course/poised to deliver even more in a development discourse. This is judged economic irrationality of proportions, and lack of foresight by all stakeholders or, worse still, averse to their interest. This is unlikely scenario, and thus the need to stay the course.

That the impressive economic growth we see, and feel in our country (as is true for total national transformation), has been a result of strategic economic initiatives is not in doubt. What puts it in doubt, (a serious concern by local as well as foreign investors/stakeholders) is the change at stake.

All these stakeholders have been very clear. To them change means change of course, with all uncertainties inherent. This is one thing any rational investor abhors. It increases their risk perception and narrows/limits their planning horizons. These stakeholders have made it clear and have been open with regard to the uncertainties the change narrative introduces in the country.

Thus, lenders, creditors, debtors, investors, and all other economic agents have all made it clear that, this changes business, changes not only their investment perceptions, and by extension their decisions. For the record, some international creditors have limited their term limits to 2017, which is a serious development we cannot wish away, or underrate for it has serious repercussions to our national project financing, and thus growth. 

Given that we face fierce competition for investments inflows, we can ill afford to create any environment that would stifle our investments promotion initiatives for this makes Rwanda un-bankable. 

Moreover, our EDPRS II, which aims at growing our economy at 11.5 per cent per annum for the next five years (2013-2018) is as ambitious as it is telling. Telling us that, for us to grow our economy by as much as 56.5 per cent for the next five years, we shall have to put in everything Rwandan and foreign by more than 80 per cent for us to attain the above development goal we have set for ourselves. The Rwandan input critical to this developmental goal is; political certainty which is the most cardinal principle for positive and incremental economic growth targets set, and without which such targets remain a guess-estimates.

Our political homework should be dependent on, and in harmony with this growth target. It cannot by means and intent be subordinated to the same. 

Turbulent Environment

Changing visionary leadership is akin to changing an experienced captain of a ship on high seas with turbulent waters. You certainly sink the ship, with all consequences attendant to the passengers/goods. No chance of reaching the destiny.

In our case, slim chances of attaining our targets, be they economic, social, political, security, infrastructure, health, name it for these have been shaped and defined by existing strong leadership, without which they would remain working paper, like it happens in many other African states.

Given that, our priorities’ report is full, we cannot divert our attention to political conformities that, only serve to scatter this report, or even demean it by any means. Nor can we place hope over experience (most of us have) that through change niceties, we shall have a better Rwanda. 

As pointed out earlier, ours has been a turbulent country, and many fatal turbulences abound among, within, and around us, now and more so downstream our development path. Under such conditions we need strong and decisive leadership to sail through.

We have one in place, exemplary one for that matter. President Paul Kagame has given us all we can hope for, and indeed more than we could ever hope for as a people and country.

This is a strong leadership that has sailed us through our immediate turbulent past, and I am very sure, our very uncertain and turbulent future. Turbulent economic future, turbulent social environment, most turbulent political panorama. Turbulent and quite fluid as well as uncertain regional environment (which affects us in every aspect one can name).  Above all, turbulent strategies and implementations thereof. 

Change for Change?

Change makes sense when in crisis whichever shape/form this takes. Crises are not all behind us, only ahead of us. Change in political dispensation also makes sense under political maturity and thus certainty.

Given the structure and ‘quality’ of our population we are far from that. Change/reform becomes apparent if the current system is not delivering. There is over-delivery amidst us. Change is desirable where leadership has lost touch with realities of real and social sectors.

Ours are architects of these sectors, and reformers of the same so much so that, we are a point of reference to many other countries. Change in political dispensation is also imperative if the existing dispensation has lost direction/control. Our visionary leadership is not only on course, but direction chartered too clear, and more too ambitious to gamble with.

Change makes sense if the system has lost ideas, and thus cannot adapt to the changes in both local and foreign environments. Our home-grown ideas have been the trademark of our growth path, brand Rwanda, and indeed have become innovations that other nations are copying to spur their development path as well.

The more daunting foreign environment, too dynamic, and most times hostile to and or indifference to our interests, is, to most cases, aligned for some for now. Being what it is, external environment poses a huge challenge to our home, and has to be factored in immensely, short of which we fall into the status quo, many African countries happen to be in.

Thus, an efficient government (read exemplary leadership) is a dream to hold on to by any developing country, and indeed is as a rare as it can possibly be. We can only lose it through means beyond our control, but certainly not by choice, least chance.

As Lucius put it: ‘When it is not necessary to change, it is necessary not to change’. Our past, present, and very uncertain future negates changes for the sake of change. It would be a gamble of last resort. 

To be continued…

The writer is an economist and a financial expert.