|
Back to Index
Pan-Africanism
and the Zimbabwe crisis
Rotimi Sankore
Extracted from Pambazuka News 319
13 September, 2007
http://pambazuka.org/en/category/features/43255
First, a statement
of principles; Every African is obliged to stand up for equality,
democracy, human rights and social justice - not just for ourselves
as individuals or only in our villages, cities, countries and regions
- but for all Africans across Africa regardless of gender, ethnicity,
race, political or religious beliefs. These must be the bedrock
of genuine Pan-Africanism. All of Africa's anti slavery, anti colonial
and liberation struggles regardless of their shortcomings [and yes
they had shortcomings] were based on these very principles and the
concept of an Africa United for social and economic development
is nothing but empty rhetoric if it is not based on them.
Consequently
for any body genuinely concerned about the future of Africa there
can be no politics of convenience. To be sure, the Zimbabwean crisis
is not the only crisis in Africa, and this writer believes that
all African's must engage any crisis that endangers the social and
economic development of Africa on the basis of the above stated
principles - be it in Darfur, DRC - or Zimbabwe.
However, the
Zimbabwean crisis is arguably the only ongoing crisis in which one
side (the incumbent government) and its supporters have mobilised
African support and silenced many by asserting more or less that
its critics are sympathisers, supporters or agents of foreign interests
and former colonial masters. This has wrongly narrowed the framework
of the debate on the Zimbabwean crisis into an oversimplified context
of African nationalism and anti colonialism versus imperialism and
colonialism. If the name of Africa is being invoked in justification
of government policy then Africans must have a position on it. As
we sometimes say, you can't call on your people, and not expect
your people to call on you.
The above in
turn underlines an outstanding feature of the crisis - that the
current Zimbabwean government is based on the country's liberation
movement - which was supported by the majority of Africans, people
of African descent and anti colonialists universally against the
undemocratic minority white Rhodesian regime of Ian Smith and its
supporters. The Zimbabwean government has re-mobilised this historical
support by positioning itself as continuing the liberation struggle
to "reclaim our land".
By framing issues
in terms of: Are you for land reform or not? Are you for or against
white farmers? Are you for or against colonialism? Are you for Africans
or the colonialists? President Mugabe has posed in a more sophisticated
way; the rhetorical statement so crudely articulated by George Bush
that it eventually backfired - "you are either with us or with
the enemy".
Such "you
are with us, or with the enemy" rhetoric regardless of the
cause which claims to serve, its sophistication or crudeness is
dangerous to human rights, to social justice and ultimately to Africa's
development because it suggests that anything can be done in the
name of defending 'us' against the alleged 'enemy' or even worse,
that anything can be done to alleged 'enemies' in the name of defending
'us'. It also suggests that no wrong can be done in the name of
fighting the alleged 'enemy' and ultimately that anything but unquestioning
loyalty is betrayal.
The continuously
evolving logic of such rhetoric is that the definition of enemy
is elastic and 'they' [but not the government] can be held responsible
for anything and everything that goes wrong. Any acceptance of such
a political philosophy by either African citizens or leaders will
stagnate intellectual progress in all fields and place Africa in
a state of permanent backwardness.
We must make
no mistake about it - all of human progress - in science, technology,
the social sciences and politics, philosophy and the arts - is based
on challenging and improving the status quo or building on previous
'standards'. Put simply, all of human progress is based on rigorous
examination of existing conventional wisdoms and on dissent. Every
African and in this case every Zimbabwean must therefore have, and
exercise the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, association
and assembly without fear of, or actually being beaten senseless,
incarcerated or killed. A situation in which people face potential
sanctions for not toeing the official line - are assaulted by 'law
enforcement' agents merely for singing and dancing [to anti government
songs], women are detained for peaceful protests, passports are
seized and lawyers are beaten for representing clients is absolutely
unacceptable. If it was wrong for minority white regimes to have
such policy and practice, it is even more wrong for a black majority
government based on a liberation movement to do the same.
Africans cannot
accept any policies from people on whose behalf we protested when
the same treatment was meted out to them. All Africans must therefore
stand firm against any idea that being in 'opposition' means people
are not human, or that they are human but don't have human rights.
It's a question of principle. All political parties must be aware
of the possibility that they will not always be in power - including
ZANU-PF. Then they will expect their rights to be defended.
If the state
of social and economic development is a key indicator of the state
of affairs in a country, a no less important indicator lies in the
possibility that all citizens can criticise their government and
its policies, offer alternate opinions and ultimately change their
government by civil means if that is the wish of the majority. No
government - not even the governments of or leaders of liberation
movements can arrogate to themselves perpetual wisdom and power.
People can debate
indefinitely whether or not the Zimbabwean crisis is as a result
of poor government policies, or has been provoked by sanctions and
dirty tricks campaigns by 'colonialists' or both. What there is
no debate about is that there is a political crisis linked to the
apparently indefinite stay in power of President Mugabe. There is
absolutely nothing anti Mugabe about anyone wondering if after 20
years as President another Zimbabwean out of its over 12 million
citizens - whether from his party or any opposition party - cannot
be elected to lead the country.
In Mozambique,
Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and other countries leaders
of liberation or anti-colonial movement governments have stepped
down and are still living - Mandela, Kaunda, Chissano, Nujoma, Mkapa
and the list is growing. In Ghana and Zambia where the last African
Union and SADC summits respectively held and the Mugabe government
made it a point to mobilise its supporters there have been successful
changes of the party of government in 2000 and 1991 respectively
without the roof caving in on those countries. 20 years is enough
for any President to make contributions to the progress of his or
her country. Nobody needs foreign governments to tell us that. On
the whole African democracy is not perfect but on the balance it
is heading in the right direction. Zimbabwe cannot be an exception
to this progressive trend.
The African
Union under the stewardship of Chairperson Konaré (himself
a former leader of Mali that also led by example) has come a long
way from the OAU and it must underline this point. It is a sign
of progress that the AU leadership and many member governments have
so far agreed with African rights campaigners that leaders of countries
with unresolved rights and governance issues cannot Chair the AU
unlike the days when even the worst of despots like Idi Amin could
Chair the former OAU with impunity. The AU and SADC must continue
in the spirit of the AU constitutive Acts, SADC Declaration and
other key principles and discourage the idea that African leaders
must stay in power indefinitely so as to avoid defeat by colonialists.
The colonialists have essentially been defeated. That is why the
country is called Zimbabwe not Rhodesia, and President Mugabe not
Ian Smith has been President for 20 years.
Yes some foreign
interests will continue to meddle in Africa, whether directly or
through proxies - this happens in almost all parts of the world.
But the future of Africa is now in the hands of Africans. Our governments
can therefore not adopt the same repressive policies of the colonialists
in the name of continuing the fight against them. It is important
to emphasise that democracy is imperfect universally and also that
the pendulum of power often swings from one end to the other between
ideologies, parties, and factions within parties. Parties also evolve
and change and what they stand for today may not be what they stood
for yesterday or will stand for tomorrow. For example, the world
watched in disbelief during the 2000 Bush versus Gore election fiasco
in the United States which were it to have happened in Africa under
the same circumstances would have been described as "typically
African".
In the spirit
of parliamentary democracy with no term limits, former Conservative
leader Margaret Thatcher whom presided over the last days of the
Rhodesian regime and whom regarded the ANC in South Africa as a
'terrorists' was tempted to go on indefinitely after 11 years as
UK Prime Minister until hounded out in tears by anti poll tax mass
protests and her own party. Most recently former Labour leader Tony
Blair under pressure from his own party and the public barely managed
to negotiate a dignified exit after 10 years in office.
In Latin America
where some governments would consider themselves as liberation type
governments, Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas for instance lost
elections in 1990 to openly foreign backed Contra's after coming
to power in 1979 on the back of a popular rebellion that overthrew
the Somoza dynasty. By the 2006 the Sandinistas had been voted back
into power. How may people looking at US politics today would realise
that founders of the Republican party in 1854 included anti-slavery
activists and that the Democrats now heavily supported by African
Americans once benefited handsomely from slave owners. The point
here is that majority of African countries have been independent
for only between 13 and 50 years and Africans must take a longer-term
view of political history.
If despite obviously
democratic imperfections many African and non African countries
have managed to change leaders and parties of governments without
the world coming to an end, there is no reason why it is impossible
for Zimbabwe to have a future without President Mugabe in power,
or for President Mugabe to live without being in power. Even Ian
Smith leader of the Rhodesian government that committed countless
atrocities against Africans and swore that Black majority rule would
never happen has lived in post colonial Zimbabwe - and is now a
grand old man of 88.
There is nothing
personal about upholding democracy; the interests of the citizens
of a country must always come before that of the leadership of any
government. The above underlines the fact that people can also debate
without end about whether the Zimbabwean economy is collapsing,
has already collapsed, or will never collapse. The fact is that
an estimated three million [undoubtedly very Black] Zimbabweans
have fled the country with many living as refugees in neighbouring
countries. They must be running from something. We now face the
debacle of armed racist farmers on the South African Zimbabwe border
fulfilling their racist fantasy by being presented with opportunities
to hunt down and round up Zimbabweans fleeing across the border
in the name of defending South Africa from invading "illegal
foreign criminals". Even if the present Zimbabwean government
claims it bears absolutely no responsibility and that drought, withdrawal
of credit lines, sanctions or even the cycle of boom and bust that
has caused recessions even in advanced industrial economies is responsible
for the economic misery, the fact is that it is almost impossible
to offer alternatives without being "bashed".
No one but the
government can be blamed for the rash of legislation that has no
other role than to contain, intimidate or suppress criticism and
peaceful opposition. The laws and policies speak for themselves
"Public Order and Security Act", "Interception of
Communications Act" and so forth. How many people demanding
uncritical loyalty for the Zimbabwean government would happily live
under laws which its just a question of a matter of time before
anyone becomes an arbitrarily victim. It makes no difference if
the foot in the boot kicking you and your rights into a dungeon
is Black or White. A kick is a kick.
'Sanctions'
cannot be blamed for everything. By way of comparison Cuba a country
of similar population and even greater anti-imperialist zeal has
faced well-documented and comprehensive blockades, sanctions and
invasions [not to mention numerous assassination attempts against
its leadership] by "foreign interests" over a greater
40-year period and on a scale far surpassing anything Zimbabwe will
ever experience. Despite obvious democratic deficits, the Cuban
government has won grudging admiration of even its critics because
healthy life expectancy in Cuba - at 67 and 70 years respectively
for men and women respectively - has risen and been sustained at
a level equivalent to and in some cases higher than in the most
advanced industrial countries. In Zimbabwe current healthy life
expectancy has sunk to 34 years and 33 years respectively for men
and women, also making Zimbabwe one of the countries in the world
where men are expected to live longer than women.
This is not
an endorsement of any section of, or all of the opposition, or even
of hypocritical foreign policy from some countries - but rather
of the right of all citizens including the political opposition
to exist without fear of repression. Just as we know that being
a liberation fighter does not guarantee that anyone will be the
best possible leader in government, we all know that being an 'opposition'
movement or leader is not a guarantee that anybody will do better
than those they seek to replace. Regardless, one of the indisputable
conditions for the development of Africa is that the principles
and culture of democracy must be institutionalised. No one should
insult the memory of countless Africans murdered by colonial settlers
to facilitate stealing of their land by suggesting repressive laws
are necessary to implement or defend land reform. Without doubt
land reform is a necessary part of social justice for Africans,
but it must be judicious, equitable and transparent land reform
based on respect for human rights and the rule of law - not land
reform used as a political cudgel to 'bash' all critical voices.
I have heard
some people argue that the 'enemies' of Africa now crying about
human rights did not burden their conscience with such luxuries
when benefiting from 400 years of industrial scale slavery, colonialism
and brutal exploitation of Africa and its peoples. In other words,
that 'white farmers' deserve some of their own medicine. Not only
does such thinking reduce African's to the moral bankruptcy of colonialists,
it also fails to understand that it risks granting unlimited and
indefinite power to Africa's actual and imaginary liberators such
that we may all end up be shackled by them. Africa's liberation
movements drew their moral strength from the fact that on the balance,
they fought for social justice, human rights, equality and democracy
- for all - not for card-carrying members of ruling parties.
The philosophical
algebra of this equation is that there should be no expectations
that these principles can be discarded as inconvenient while still
counting on the unwavering support of all Africans. Africans must
therefore unite for social justice and human rights across Africa
- including in Zimbabwe. Some people also think that because of
either real or imagined 'western' hypocrisy we must always give
unconditional loyalty to the Mugabe or any government that claims
to be defending Africa against 'imperialism'.
The hypocrisy
may be real but our primary concern must be the welfare of Africans,
not whether President Bush as part of his politics of convenience
- supports the Musharraf military regime in Pakistan which was suspended
from the Commonwealth in 1999 for overthrowing an elected government
(while simultaneously passing the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic
Act), or even whether some of the western media engage in 'colonial
mentality' reporting which fulfils negative stereotypes of Africa.
Our health care system, education, food and overall social justice
and development must come first. It is impossible to build on development
achievements if everyone must agree with official policy. Regardless
of party affiliation nobody's stomach is neutral on the question
of hunger. No disease asks for your party card.
While all Africans
with any dignity must remain firmly anti-colonial and anti-racist,
we must also view with scepticism any blanket anti-western and anti-white
rhetoric. Not withstanding that some foreign governments described
the ANC and other liberation movements as "communists"
and "terrorists" or both, while simultaneously supporting
bandit governments such as the Mobutu regime, Africa's anti colonial
and liberation movements were supported by millions across the world
including from the West. Even some governments such as the Swedish
were proud supporters of liberation movements and post independence
governments long before it became fashionable to do so.
President Mugabe
is a former teacher and one of Africa's most educated and experienced
leaders. After over 2 decades in power, he does not really need
anyone to tell him that it is not only possible to be in office
without being in power; it is also possible to be in power without
moral authority. Once any leader anywhere gets to that point it
is irrelevant what you claim to stand for. What will become relevant
is that you did not stand down when you should have done so - of
your own free will - and in the best interests of your people.
*Sankore is a Pan-Africanist
and Human Rights Campaigner
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|
