Love me tender – Transition vers où ?

Abstract

Depuis le coup d’État de 2009, la transition menée par Andry Rajoelina, dure malgré l’absence de tout mandat électif. Même si l’inertie de cette situation est parfois relativisée par des pressions nationales ou extérieures, elle est légitimée par la passivité de la résistance et par des promesses récurrentes d’élections futures. Cependant, ces trois années nous permettent au moins de cerner la vision des autorités actuelles quant au développement de Madagascar. Les gouvernants de facto semblent baser ce développement sur l’exploitation des ressources minières ; ils inscrivent ainsi le pays dans une politique menant à l’effondrement du reste de l’économie ainsi qu’à la dilapidation du capital environnemental et humain. Or, ce choix fait de Madagascar une victime facile de la « malédiction des matières premières » dont une minorité seulement profite et dont les conséquences à long terme sont désastreuses. L’ensemble de la société est alors amené à s’interroger sur les valeurs sur lesquelles elle entend bâtir les vertus civiques et sur la capacité de la « transition » à mener le pays sur les rails du développement durable basé sur une démocratie stable.

ABSTRACT
Following the March 2009 coup, the government led by former ‘disc jockey’ Andry Rajoelina, has managed to perpetuate in the absence of any elections. Several reasons explain this longevity, of which the lack of legitimacy of his undertaking which has led to passive resistance. The authorities however, do want to prepare elections to legitimize their power. Being in command of the State, these authorities benefit from the administrative privilege of organising elections. This would allow them to be elected, according to well - established mechanisms. The integration of members of the opposition into the institutions of transition illustrates the relative failure of this strategy; failure due to internal pressure and the reticence of international donors. Nevertheless these three years allow us to determine the visions that the de facto leaders hold of development on the Grande Ile. To achieve their goals, they count in particular on making use of the ‘manna’ from mining, which will flow from several mining companies in a few months. Several warning signs serve to indicate that Madagascar is a victim of the ‘curse of raw materials’ and will be even more so in the future. While this strengthens the militarisation of political power, this curse emerges in a worrying fashion in at least three ways: i) the collapse of the real and informal economies not linked to the mining sector; ii) the squandering of natural capital with the hurried exportation of raw materials with little value added (the resources acquired thanks to the sale of mineral and more general natural resources are currently invested in sectors that do not provide social benefits in the long term. They serve, beyond the personal enrichment of the members of the ruling class, to foster populism through a system of rents and prebends. The goal is to remain in power at the expense of sustainable development; iii) the squandering of human capital through de - scholarisation and the perpetuation of the collapse of the school and university systems, demonstrating that the training of youth is considered more of an obstacle than an asset to sustainable development. This transitional government pursues unambiguous objectives, which benefit only a minority. These objectives appear clearly in the behaviour of numerous leaders. One can therefore ask oneself on what values can society build civic virtues. This governance therefore calls into question the nature of ‘transition’ and its capacity to lead the country on the road to a sustainable development based on a stable democracy.