The Benevolent Dictator

I have long been a supporter of the idea of a benevolent dictator. Benevolent is a very subjective word. And sometimes the benevolence of the dictator only shows in certain areas, and the term is only applied long after the person has left office, as the fruits of some of their labor come to fruition.

Ibrahim Babangida was the dictator, and “President for Life” of Nigeria from 1985 until 1993. He came into office saying he would address the Human Rights abuses. Nicknamed the “Evil Genius”, the list of abuses perpetrated at his hand is only vaguely known. It is pure irony to see that he lead the coup in 1985 on the basis of investigating the Human Rights Violations.

Babangida instead joins my short list of benevolent dictators based on his economic reform. When he came into office the Nira, the Nigeria Currency was exchanged at a rate the government set. A rate that bore no resemblance to the black market trading that was booming. The International Monetary Fund insisted on some changes, very gradual, if Babangida wanted to continue with the nice interest rates on National Debts and other things. Babangida was not going to take orders from anyone, let alone from the IMF. He set instead a very swift and broad set of reforms for the Nigerian people. Many price controls were lifted. Government owned businesses were privatized. The Nigerian people laughed, and loved him. (When they weren’t being thrown in jail, and tortured by him for any negative comments!) We can now look back and see the Babangida period showed steady economic growth.

Babangida bears mention as a benevolent dictator. He did for the country in his economic reforms what had not been done before. With his power, and force of authority he made things happen. He simply set the policy and said figure it out, do it, regardless of the consequences. He didn’t depend on popularity to keep him in power.

In much the same way Joaquin Balaguer enacted environmental reforms on the Dominican Republic. He was integral in maintaining and adding land to the 74 national parks that make up 32% of the land. To see the island now, there is a marked difference in the forested Dominican side, and the nude, over farmed, eroded Haitian side. The benefit of his long range planning is very evident.

When Balaguer came into office he put a moratorium on logging, and the saw mills. He was not nice or gentle about it. He sent in the army to bomb, kill, and otherwise completely destroy the saw mills. They were logging illegally on park land. The illegal logging was creating a huge soil erosion problem. The soil erosion problem was in turn trickling down to the hydro-electric dams. As lakes became filled with run off soil, the electric plants were in danger. Not to mention all the environmental fall out of clear cut, over harvesting, illegal logging. To save the hydro-electric dams, the illegal logging had to be stopped.

Poor squatters, and rich supporters had all moved in, built huge mansions, and shanty town farms on park land. Bulldozers were ordered in. Mansions of wealthy supporters of the president were taken out along with the farms of the poor. Everyone living on the park land was evicted. The wealthy supporters of Balaguer were stunned that he would bulldozer their mansions. Of course the poor deserved their fate! But the wealthy, his friends, personal friends! HOW DARE HE!

The Dominican Republic is still a very poor and unstable place. But unlike Haiti, it still has forests, and can still feed its own population. Thanks to the long vision of Balaguer, and his willingness to do the unspeakable, push people off the park land, forests have been saved. The Dominican’s dams and hydro-electricity were preserved. At a cost, mind you. Balaguer wasn’t very nice. He killed many of the people on the park lands. To quote wikipedia “Balaguer ordered the construction of schools, hospitals, dams, roads, and many important buildings. He also presided over steady economic growth.”

Today Haiti is the country that is the poorest in the America’s. The Dominican Republic could have easily qualified. It shares the same island, and the same natural resources. Instead, with Dictators like Balaguer, some of its resources have been managed in such a way to bring long term economic benefit, and not depletion to the people.

When we look around the world, we see many examples of benevolent dictators. Eva Peron, Seretse Khama, and the ancient Shoguns of Japan to name a few. Each took control of the country, and did what had to be done for the long term viability of the people. There are incidences of true cruelty. Eva Peron was known for jailing, and killing her opponents. No one spoke of how much she spent on her wardrobe. There were many accusations of fraud. They were well founded. She brought Argentina into its own, and made it a power in its own right. The Shoguns of Japan have a similar reputation. Hard people, who governed with a ruthless streak. But their legacy is a First World Country with a very high quality of life. We American’s do not have the long history of stability, and management like the Japanese. Seretse Khama, the long time “President” of Botswana, whose son Ian Khama is now the president. Much more a modern Monarchy. Botswana, once the poorest African nation, now with a quality of life that is recognizable to the American eye. My parents live there, they go to the Mall on a regular basis. My Dad can’t miss his regular stop at Mug and Bean, the Botswana equivalent of Starbucks. In a continent rife with coups, and lack of education, Botswana’s astounding infrastructure is a miracle.

Government by the people, for the people is not always what’s best. Sometimes it takes a big man, willing to do what is not liked for the long term sustainability of his people.