Country Report Namibia May 2011

The political scene: The defence budget causes some controversy

There have been no significant domestic political developments during the period under review. The nine opposition parties have yet to confirm their intention to appeal to the Supreme Court over the dismissal in mid-February by the High Court in Windhoek of their application to have the November 2009 National Assembly election, or the official results, declared null and void. Most attention has focused on the parliamentary scrutiny of the budget for fiscal year 2011/12 (April-March) presented on March 9th (April 2011, Economic policy) and the budgets of individual ministries. The defence budget (8% of total expenditure) has caused most controversy, the minister of defence, Charles Namoloh, trying partly to justify the N$3.1bn (US$410m) allocation to his ministry on the grounds of the need to guard against any repercussions of the unrest currently affecting North Africa.

Mr Namoloh told parliament on April 15th that Namibians should be "prepared to sacrifice resources for defence", as the Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states were "not immune to similar turbulences as seen in North Africa". A strong Namibian Defence Force (NDF) was needed to guarantee Namibia's continued "peace and stability", Mr Namoloh added. The ministry's N$2.6bn operational budget includes acquiring and upgrading "appropriate weapons systems" for the NDF, along with the purchase of aircraft for the air force and vessels for the navy (both are wings of the NDF). The N$484m (US$64m) capital allocation is to be used for the research and development of armaments and military equipment, along with the construction of new NDF bases at Gobabis, Karibib, Keetmanshoop, Oluno and Walvis Bay. The Namibian newspaper commented that, although Mr Namoloh was right in saying that popular unrest in SADC was possible, he was wrong to think that the role of the military was to quell internal unrest.

© 2011 The Economist lntelligence Unit Ltd. All rights reserved
Whilst every effort has been taken to verify the accuracy of this information, The Economist lntelligence Unit Ltd. cannot accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on this information
IMPRINT