I just don't get invited to the right parties
Just something that struck me in the context of the Charles Taylor trial (and rilly, does anyone at all believe that the mysterious gift to a supermodel is the only piece of evidence connecting Taylor to the RUF?[1] Is this a bad movie?). Everyone's concentrating on Naomi Campbell, but what the fuck was Quincy Jones doing there? Why was Mia Farrow scoffing appetizers with Charles Taylor? Imran Khan, anyone? This was 1997, shortly after Taylor had been elected post-civil-war President of Liberia and at least three or four years after anyone might have had any excuse at all for not knowing what kind of a bastard he was.
More to the point, what was Nelson Mandela doing there? The presence of Campbell, Farrow, Jones and the other celebs is actually quite easy to understand; this was a promotional dinner for a luxury train service that had just been launched. The PR agency had, correctly, assessed that if they got Mandela in as the super-double-alpha-prime-A-list "anchor tenant", it would be child's play to get a bunch of merely A-list celebrities in to bask in the glamour, which would ensure sufficient publicity and attract the real targets of the dinner - various rich people and corporate cronies who they wanted to book seats on their train. It's a simple matter of topology; the purpose of having Naomi Campbell there is that not everyone can sit next to Nelson Mandela, and the purpose of having Mia Farrow there is that not everyone can sit next to Naomi Campbell. I presume that the celebrities present are under the impression that they're attending a salon to discuss world peace, but I know a lad who has a job organising similar events, and for brutal commercial cynicism, he makes me look like Vashti Bunyan.
I am not sure whether Taylor was invited in his capacity as a celebrity (any president of anywhere is someone that people will pay money to sit next to, especially in the land of natural resource curse), or in his personal capacity as a consumer of luxury goods. But it's pretty clear to me that the event basically revolved around the man who people who people pay money to sit next to will pay money to sit next to; Mandela himself, who was apparently giving the apostolic seal of approval to one of the last twenty years' worst people.[2]
I think that the underlying story here is one that South African journalists regularly write about - the fact that for the last ten to fifteen years, Mandela has suffered from an inability to say no to a crowd of hangers-on, particularly when one of his charities (who in my opinion really ought to have a lot more imagination in their fund raising than constantly relying on the personal star power of their patron) is involved. As a result of this, he has been spread out thinner than jam on a boarding-house scone.
[1] Or even that having given a bag of diamonds to a model is actually anything more than circumstantial evidence of gun running in any case. Quite apart from the fact that Liberia mines its own diamonds and so there's no way of telling that the presents were Leonean, the bad thing that Taylor is accused of is sending guns to Sierra Leone, not taking diamonds from it, per se. If you followed the press coverage of this trial you would conclude that it was a case that was all about "blood diamonds" and wonder if the Hague tribunal attached some religious significance to handling stones that had not been blessed by the De Beers corporation. I've written on "blood diamonds" before, but I honestly think some people writing about the Campbell appearance seem to believe that they are literally covered in blood.
[2] There is an off-chance that there's more to the Mandela/Taylor connection than meets the eye here, as they are both friends of Moammar Qadaffi. But the timing doesn't really match up here, and I don't see why the Mandela/Qadaffi relationship, which is based partly on Qadaffi's support for the ANC in the tough years, and partly on the fact that two regional superpowers ought to make an effort to get along, would translate into a relationship with one of Qadaffi's old proteges.
More to the point, what was Nelson Mandela doing there?
ReplyDeleteWell, that's not really more to the point. It was a party for the relaunch of the South African Blue Train. It was held at his house in Cape Town. He was, at the time, president of South Africa. There's really no huge mystery there. Nor for the rest of the celebs, for whom I think your analysis holds water.
What on earth Charles Taylor was doing there is the real puzzle. The photo doesn't show any other heads of state apart from Mandela and it's a bit of an odd one to invite heads of state to. Also: evil bastard.
"doing there" is perhaps wrong but the point is the last paragraph - a dinner for the launch of a luxury rail service is precisely the sort of worthless PR gig that smarter handlers would keep Mandela out of, even today when he doesn't have administrative responsibilities. Even if the PR team hadn't fucked up by putting a war criminal in the photo op (and I would not be surprised at all do discover that Taylor had the same agency and this was why he was invited), it's still a waste of time.
ReplyDeletehmmm.... a bit of googology reveals that Charles Taylor's PR company of the time was Cohen & Woods International, spinners to the despotic gentry. They don't list PRASA as a client, but "We will be happy to consider “teaming” or other associational arrangements, acting as “prime” or “sub” contractor, when that meets the wishes or needs of our clients. In some cases, we will ourselves propose such arrangements, with the goal of bringing to our clients the best talent that we can identify to work with us to maximize the prospects for success."
actually scratch that - per the TAP article, C&W were only retained in 1999. I bet it was a PR agency that explains it though.
ReplyDeleteThe Guardian made the not-unreasonable sounding point this morning that Taylor had just become president of Liberia in 1997, which may explain why he was specifically invited.
ReplyDeleteYebut,
ReplyDeletea) Liberia is not a historic ally of SA, or a neighbour or a particularly important trading partner
b) Taylor was elected in the most controversial circumstances imaginable and was persona non grata nearly everywhere else, wasn't he?
He's not someone like Qaddaffi who you have to have the occasional dinner with because he's in charge of a big and important country - he's a nasty pipsqueak who brought nothing to the table except reputational risk. Unless I'm missing something.
It makes more sense, I think, if you look at it from a mid-90s Air Miles-esque perspective - the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was in full swing, and SA was making the transition into a relatively peaceable democractic state without lining the worst of the ancien regime up against the wall. It was naive, yes, but trying to gently bring a sinner back into the fold fits right in with Mandela's role (and apparent sincere beliefs).
ReplyDeletea dinner for the launch of a luxury rail service is precisely the sort of worthless PR gig that smarter handlers would keep Mandela out of
ReplyDeleteI dunno, boosting local industry's a big part of being a head of state. Look at all the stuff the Royal Family does.
What I want to know is: did Taylor bring the diamonds along specifically for Naomi Campbell; does he always travel with a few diamonds just in case; or had he put them in the side pocket of his roller suitcase on a previous trip and simply forgotten they were there? (I've done this with stuff. Guidebooks, mainly. You forget to go through every pocket when you get home and unpack, and then the suitcase goes back in the cupboard.)
does he always travel with a few diamonds just in case; or had he put them in the side pocket of his roller suitcase on a previous trip and simply forgotten they were there?
ReplyDeleteI've still got a few dollars and euros in my wallet just to cover any little expenses that may crop up between getting off the plane and the nearest ATM. I'd imagine that dictators find it similarly useful to carry a slush fund around with them for those little bribes you can't predict.
Makes sense. If I were a maniac warlord trying to flatter a not-too-bright supermodel, I'd probably do it with cut diamonds, which are recognisably sparkly, rather than uncut, which (as it turns out) she thought were just rather dull-looking pebbles.
ReplyDeleteThey could just as easily have come from one of his entourage.
ReplyDeleteThe more interesting question. What did the guy that she gave them to do with them...
per this evening's Standard, the former director of Mandela's charity has just remembered that he did get the stones after all. To have returned them to Campbell would have been embarrassing, while to have sold them for the benefit of the charity might have compromised the organisation. "In the end", he says "I decided it would be best if I kept them".
ReplyDeleteOnly 2 footnotes? C'mon, you can do better than that. You've given strong evidence of that recently. Where's your quality control? The variance is appalling. / marcel
ReplyDelete"Taylor was elected in the most controversial circumstances imaginable and was persona non grata nearly everywhere else, wasn't he?"
ReplyDeletePerhaps it's as simple as a camaraderie between post-colonial African leaders? The kind of ill-considered, undeserved respect that leads to a Mugabe getting way more slack than he deserves from his peers.
Then again, maybe Mandela's participation hinged on having another head of state there to provide some gravitas and avoid it being just a bunch of vapid celebs, and Taylor was the only one available for such a paltry event.
As for why did Taylor have the diamonds... I wonder if he met with Viktor Bout afterward. He was kicking around there then, wasn't he?
Not sure of it, but I think Mandela was along with Obasandjo, one of the guys who actually believed (and may have promotted) the idea of the New Charles Taylor, Democratically Elected.
ReplyDeleteDubious elections and everything, you have to consider the fact that it's still an election and it's better than a civil war.
Look at how Kabila The Younger is treated.
And Jeune Afrique mentionned somewhere that Taylor was actually a nice and pleasant guy... at these kind of functions.
re Bout, that was indeed the era when he was working out of Pietersburg in South Africa, before the Foreign Military Assistance Act was passed and the mercs and smugglers had to get out of town.
ReplyDeleteAlla Bout's ragtrade business was set up; Deirdre Ward's credit cards hadn't yet been maxed out. An African renaissance, indeed.