They then literally sprayed it with bullets although the big, bearded man was still recognisable as the Angolan government paraded his bullet-ridden body to journalists and the rest of the world.

What a sigh of relief this must have been for the authorities in Luanda.

Because Savimbi and his movement, Unita, had, for about three decades, been fighting one of the largest armies in sub-Saharan Africa but with no signs of slowing down even in the post-apartheid period when there was no longer support from Pretoria.

And it managed to evade them even when the Namibian Government decided to join the war on the side of the Angolan government: a move that almost brought the economy of north-eastern Namibia to its knees, plus wide-spread violations of human rights in that part of the country.

Savimbi's death was thus seen as opening a window of opportunity for one of Africa's war-ravaged countries to find peace and perhaps to start picking up and putting the pieces together.

Thus, after many failed peace accords and agreements; it only took the death of one man to end the civil war in Angola.

It is not farfetched to say that Savimbi indeed defined the politics of his country for better or for worse, depending on one's take of the broader configuration of the Angolan war at the time.

Perhaps with the exception of Angola's first President, Agostinho Neto, no other person has had such a profound influence on events in that country as Savimbi.

It is therefore appropriate to speak of 'a post-Savimbi era' in Angolan politics and to perhaps start asking questions about the nature of the current political developments and what direction the peace process has taken so far.

Is a process of peace building underway in Angola today or has the MPLA government just been repositioning itself in the aftermath of Savimbi's death and it's now business as usual? These are important questions to pose because some sceptics have argued that the demise of Savimbi, although it brought about the end of the civil war, might not necessarily lead to a process of peace building, broadly understood, given the regime's own record of neglecting the majority of its own people.

In fact, one might argue that whatever limited developments the government tried to implement have been as result of the pressure from Unita and thus Government attempts to win the hearts and minds of the Angolan masses in its effort to fight the rebel movement.

Now that Savimbi is no more, there might not be any pressure on the government to implement any socio-economic programmes and the country would thus revert to its highly corrupt and statist nature.

We also need to pose these questions because Angola is one country that hardly features in the media in the region, let alone the rest of Africa and the world a la Zimbabwe.

Although there are fundamental problems relating to peace, state and nation building projects that are supposed to be underway.

The other issue that hardly attracts the attention of the press and commentators is that President Eduardo dos Santos has been in power for more than 20 years but no one calls for his retirement.

He has been in power much longer than our other neighbour - Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

Since he succeeded Neto in 1979, he has not been elected - he is basically a non-elected President.

Luckily, he has been totally insulated from the watchful eye of the media.

So what many Namibians know about Angola, are the 'two Angolas' that we, until recently, accommodated in Namibia - the one based at Osire refugee camp and the other that was freely allowed to roam the streets of Windhoek because of their petro-dollars and their luxurious cars.

But that's how Angolan society has always been, even before independence.

Independence only exacerbated this.

We are seeing a similar pattern in Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa.

Thus, although the economy is said to be booming, especially the windfall from the oil revenue, little of this trickles down to the masses.

Most of it ends up in Luanda and its environs - being shared among the corrupt elite and their families, friends and foreigners.

It is estimated that a quarter of the billions in oil revenue goes missing every year without it being accounted for.

Thus no one is brought to book.

One might argue the country has just emerged from a long war with only four years of peace (or rather absence of war!) and it is therefore unrealistic to expect any meaningful changes to the life of many Angolans.

More is needed.

I'm sure most have come across that line of argumentation many times even in our Namibian context.

It has become a convenient excuse for not doing anything.

Not only that.

In a very short period of time a small clique of people are becoming millionaires.

If we can allow some people to become nouveau riche in such a short period, we should surely be able to provide clean drinking water to each and every community? Now there are talks of elections next year to apparently elect a president and a National Assembly.

Don't hold you breath for these elections because nothing fundamental is going to change.

First of all, Dos Santos has not yet indicated that he is about to retire and, taking a cue from the African experience, it's not easy to dislodge an incumbent president with elaborate state resources at his disposal.

There have been some bright spots on the continent recently, but these have been in countries where the leaders have embraced democratic ideals.

I don't think the MPLA's leadership has done so.

Not to forget the curse of oil.

Columns Of The Last 48 Hours

•  Swapo Is Not The State
•  Political Perspective
•  Uganda's Smart Protectionism
•  Who Wants Cold War II?
•  An Obama-Biden Foreign Policy
•  Redefining Our Foreign Policy Priorities And Actions Outside
•  From the Sidelines : Govt needs to do more