|
BRAINSTORMING RACIAL RECONCILIATION IN SOUTHERN AFRICA Paper presented at the First
International Conference on Race: Racial Reconciliation ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION The paper analyses the dynamics of racial reconciliation in the region, with major examples drawn from Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa. These settler states were the last in the whole of the African continent to achieve black majority rule in 1980, 1990 and 1994 respectively. The British first occupied Zimbabwe in 1890 while the first Dutch people arrived in South Africa in 1652 with the British arriving in the 19th century in that country. The Portuguese colonized Mozambique and Angola. The Germans initially ruled Namibia and the Boers later ruled until the achievement of majority rule in 1988.1The presence of many settlers in the region led to racial conflicts over the sharing of resources including land. Those conflicts are still haunting the region. Southern African countries belong to the Southern African Development Community (SADC) a grouping for economic co-operation similar to the Economic Community for the West African States (ECOWAS). Located in Sub-Saharan Africa, Southern Africa is a region plagued by many conflicts and problems. For example, it is experiencing the most severe HIV/AIDS epidemic in the whole world with a number of critical factors peculiar to the region believed to be responsible for the spread of the epidemic. Such factors include the inequalities of wealth and rising poverty especially among women, social disruption, violence and considerable population movement and gender inequality and inequity.2 Racial conflict is just one of the problems that has always haunted the
region because of the presence of different racial groups in the region.
In the conflict whites have been treated as an homogenous group that has
always been exploiting and oppressing the black people who are regarded
as the original inhabitants of the region. The paper begins by giving
a brief historical background to the racial conflict in the region and
argues that if not well-tackled, racial conflict poses a serious threat
to the socio-economic and political stability of the region and that this
calls for serious racial reconciliation mechanisms in the region. Reasons
for the failure of reconciliation are also suggested. Identifying the
source of conflict and addressing it is fundamental if sustainable reconciliation
is to be achieved. Militarization and politicization of conflicts has
very costly effects on the region and leads to more racial polarization. The importance of trauma and memory is briefly discussed together with
other tools that may be used in raising awareness. The paper highlights
different views of reconciliation that are held by different sections
and communities in these societies and analyses such views to discern
their practicability in promoting racial reconciliation in the region.
The expulsion of any racial group is the worst thing that can happen in
this 21st century and the need for co-existence and mutual tolerance for
diversity is emphasized. Racial conflict in Southern Africa, especially in Zimbabwe, South Africa and Namibia poses a serious threat to the socio-economic and political stability of the region if it remains unresolved. According to Ibbo Mandaza, the region has geo-political and historically concrete issues that can only be understood through the analysis of various historical political and socio-economic factors that have combined to define the region as we know it today. This means that conflicts that are likely to arise in this region will inevitably bear the stamp of the dynamics of the history of the region and racial conflict is no exception to this trend. Settler colonial rule and its manifestations is the central defining feature. Apartheid, being the defining moment of the system, had both internal and negative consequences.3 White settler colonialism in Southern Africa bequeathed a social formation
quite unique and somewhat distinct from the colonial situation in the
rest of Africa. It was loaded, as much in its "historic mission"
as in its design, with the pursuit of a permanent colonial situation,
the White Dominion in which the White classes as a whole would forever
occupy a position at the top of the race-caste-class-hierarchy. This was
supported by the enactment of specific legal provisions and political
and socio-economic structures. Automatically, the white settler colonial
situation became a class struggle. In this, it became the major objective
of the white settler colonial state to try and manage and mediate these
class forces towards the survival and sustenance of the system, seeking
to project "a world divided into compartments" of White and
Black. Legally this involved a search for a definition of such racial
or color terms and categories as White/Europeans half caste /Coloreds
and Native/Africans, all perceived as conforming with such a class status
as was implicit in the race-caste-class hierarchy. Socio-economically,
such a policy meant the reconstruction of "economic safeguards"
and protective legislation that sought to sustain the Whites above the
status of Coloreds and Africans.4Those economic safeguards are the source
of conflict today as the post-colonial governments are yet to rectify
the inequalities that emanate from such safeguards. Some commentators argue that the future of the post-colonial state in Southern Africa, especially the 'settler states" will depend on the manner and time frame within which the National Question will be completely solved, in particular, the resolution of the Land Question, the question of wages and an improved standard of living of the mass of the African people who have so far remained largely where White settler colonialism and apartheid left them together with the democratization of the education and health systems and the removal of forms of repression and exploitation that characterized white settler colonialism and apartheid. All this is intrinsically linked to the race question itself, the extent to which the colonial and the conventional class structure, a race-caste-class-hierarchy will have been transformed in the course of the transition. There is also the global question and the international division of labor that has seen the third world remain at the bottom of the human heap and the political and economic processes in the African situation itself, particularly in the former white settler colonial and apartheid regimes.6 Archie Mafeje also argues that there are practical questions to be answered regarding the National Question in Africa in general and in the "settler societies" of Southern Africa in particular. For Mafeje, this National Question which is inextricably bound with racial oppression and exploitation has polarized these societies into "us", the Blacks, and "them", the White settlers variously known as "Rhodies" in Zimbabwe and as "Boers" in South Africa and Namibia where the term is used to designate all white supremacists. Some analysts, to posit the existence of two "nations", an oppressing and exploiting white nation and an exploited black nation have used the concept of "national oppression".7 These divisions should be narrowed if racial reconciliation is to succeed. In Southern Africa, the National Question centers on two issues, that is, anti-racial domination and redistribution of wealth between Whites and Blacks without which there can be no social democracy which involves a conscious and a continuing improvement of the conditions of the livelihood of the oppressed and exploited mass of the population. However, at the same time it has to be understood that social democracy is not a panacea for all social ills in society as like any aspect of development, it has its own limitation.8 For Mafeje, when looked at from this angle, the policy of reconciliation in the three white settler societies in Southern Africa is a social and economic fraud because whilst it offers a change of heart, it is devoid of any resolutions to existing contradictions at the socio-economic level. Therefore, if retribution is ruled out on the grounds of rationality and political expediency, then restitution should be the guiding principle on exactly the same grounds. However, if this view is taken to the extreme, it may not be acceptable to some sections of society and may disrupt the economy and even scare away foreign investors. To Mafeje, the above view is a "usual rationalization" that serves to maintain the status quo.9 The Peace and Security Research Programme (PSRP) in Southern Africa thus argues that there is need to arrive at a regional conflict matrix rooted in the socio-economic and political dynamics of the region. This matrix will seek to reveal not only the root causes of the conflicts but also suggest the extent to which these conflicts are embedded in the same root cause(s). In this matrix, key assumptions are that this region constitutes a conflict system, that regional conflicts are inter-related, interactive and have reciprocal effects, that regional conflicts, be they interstate or intrastate, may be traced to common causes, that change in one conflict area may affect other areas and that regional conflict resolution should be historically conceived.10 Therefore, in the light of the above arguments, it is argued that racial
conflict in Southern Rhodesia's "settler states" may be traced
to common causes that are interrelated, interactive and can easily spread
across the borders. Hence there is need to come up with methods of reconciliation
that are not only applicable to one state, but those that are applicable
to the whole region so as to enhance the socio-economic and political
stability and prosperity of all social groups regardless of race, color
or creed. Racial reconciliation has been defined as a process whereby at least two racial groups agree to come together and work to empower both parties usually after a process of racial discrimination, violence or war. It aims at achieving a constructive or positive idea out of a "dark and hurtful past. It does not mean forgetting but remembering the past in order to ensure that discrimination may never be repeated not only by former oppressors but also that present generations may not assume the role of new racial discriminators. It involves forgiveness, which is an act of freeing oneself from a burden of hate and desire for or right to avenge whilst simultaneously freeing the other party from the burden of perpetual guilt and fear.11 A white youth group in South Africa defined reconciliation as "seeing another's point of view", a colored youth group defined it as "coming together" whilst a black youth group defined it as "practical acts, not just hugs and kisses."12 All these definitions at least stress the need for each other's tolerance. Reconciliation in its complete form is not and was never meant to be necessarily a day's affair. The same can also be said of forgiveness that, according to Kenneth Kaunda is not just an isolated act like the granting of pardon, but it is a constant willingness to live in a new day without looking back and ransacking the memory for occasions of bitterness and resentment.13 Victor de Waal defined reconciliation as a demonstration of human maturity so far rarely equaled in the world. In Zimbabwe reconciliation was an example of practical politics solidly based on the moral principle.14 To be noted is that there in no regionally recognized definition of racial reconciliation in Southern Africa. This, according to Mandaza, reflects the post-colonial state's apparent confusion over policy during transition. This confusion has seen the development of new but strange political discourse that has thrown up its own lexicon like "non racial democracy", "affirmative action", "indigenization", and "reconciliation". All these terms, it is argued, reflect the inherent weakness of a class of rulers so compromised by the circumstances of the transitional arrangements that saw Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa born, that is, through the negotiated settlements.15One can argue that negotiated settlements recognized the importance of co-existence of all racial groups and avoided a situation of racial intolerance like in Mozambique where the Portuguese were given twenty-four hours to pack and vacate the country after the achievement of majority rule in that country. B. Hamber and H. van der Merwe also argue that reconciliation is a complex and relatively new term for Southern Africa and the whole world. Despite the TRC in South Africa popularizing the term, the TRC has not provided the country with a clear definition of what it really means. A uniform and popular understanding of reconciliation still appears to be a long way off as seldom do people in South Africa talk about the same thing when they refer to reconciliation. Equally so, the final outcome of the so-called reconciled society in South Africa means different things to different people. Probably people agree that reconciliation embodies some positive connotations about coming together and healing past conflicts. A complete understanding of the term is seldom debated or spelt out clearly.16 In South Africa, there are about five ideologies linked to reconciliation. According to Hamber and van der Merwe, the first can be termed the non-racial ideology of reconciliation. This basically is about dissolving the racial identities arising from the policies of the past. Whites are seen to largely carry the blame for past divisions and conflicts and are thus urged to acknowledge this to become part of a new society. The TRC is tasked to convert people through confession and acknowledgement into non-racial citizens of a harmonious, integrated social setting or a new "rainbow" nation.17 The second ideology is based on an intercommunity understanding, which is, acknowledging the existence of separate communities with different cultures and histories. Reconciliation here is about bridging the devides of the past whilst emphasizing the need for improved communication and better understanding between groups in the belief that this will eventually lead to a greater co-operation and co-existence at the individual and political level. The TRC's role is to facilitate improved communication and mutual tolerance of diversity. The third ideology is the strong religious ideology of reconciliation
based on honest and forgiveness. It uses church teaching to rediscover
a new conscious of the individual and society through moral reflection,
repenting, confessing and rebirth. The TRC's role is to confront people
with the evils of their deeds and challenge them to repent and not repeat
atrocities. However, here people run risks of mistakenly equating forgiveness
of past enemies with reconciliation. The last ideology views reconciliation as a form of community building.
Reconciliation here is concerned with individual relationships rather
with broad and abstract values of co existence and national political
tolerance. In this case reconciliation requires the clearing of mistrust
between the previous conflicting parties and rebuilding personal bonds
at local level, bonds believed to have broken down by past conflicts.
The TRC is to facilitate a public airing of allegations and suspicions
and then help in the reconstruction of inter personal relationship through
creating space for direct interaction by conflict resolution initiatives.
However these ideologies can and often do co exist quite comfortably.18
Therefore there is a need for an approach that takes the interests of local communities more seriously to address the victim's criticisms that the TRC has been about political rather that victim-centered process. Others argue that the strength of the human rights approach, accepted internationally and may be the introduction of prosecution of perpetrators, together with a greater emphasis on local communities reconciliation and the delivery of reparations to victims may serve to foster integration and complete South Africa's complex reconciliation puzzle.20 However prosecution of perpetrators can increase polarization and amount to "witch hunt". Kaunda, writing in 1980 opposed the payment of reparations. He questioned how at the end of the day can the guilt part make reparations for crimes so horrible that any compensation would be pathetical inadequate and argues that the whole world does not contain enough treasure to pay that bill. Whilst Dr. Kaunda's point is valid, one may argue that the payment of reparations may be the perpetrator's necessary way of acknowledging their responsibility over the victims' predicament and practical way of reciprocating forgiveness.21 Culture, which means a people's way of life, their perceptions and actions, can also be used as a tool for fostering racial reconciliation. According to Zakes Mda, in apartheid South Africa culture was used to reinforce racial segregation, political oppression and economic exploitation but artists always challenged that through a Theatre of Resistance. After the end of the apartheid era, a Theatre of Reconciliation mushroomed mobilizing people towards reconciliation. Artists in this category include singers like Vusi Mahlasela, poets like Mziwakhe Mbuli playwrights like Athol Furgard through his play entitled "Play-land". According to Coleen Angove, the theatre of reconciliation gives a perspective "in which the reality of a polarized society is defined to present human beings from all racial and cultural groups, communicating, sharing and understanding", though it is a theatre not devoid of fear, insecurity and introspection. It aims to depict that there are possible solutions to the status quo and transcends present reality to display to its audience a potential South Africa.22 Theatre can thus be a very powerful local tool that promotes reconciliation, forgiveness and healing at community level. The situation in South Africa is very much unlike that in Zimbabwe at
the moment where the state media and state-sponsored musicians are preaching
what may be called "politics of hate" between races, further
widening the racial divide/polarization. Musicians included in this category
are Chinx Chingaira, Marko Sibanda and Tambaoga who likens current British
Prime Minister Tony Blair to a blair toilet and this even contravenes
the local Broadcasting Act. Marko Sibanda cynically urges all white farmers
to load all land in Zimbabwe into aeroplanes and take it back to Britain
if they think that it belongs to them. The situation is worsened by the
fact that government ministers compose some of the songs. As a result,
the ordinary men in society especially those in rural areas have been
made to believe that all Zimbabwe's problems are caused by Britain, America
and their local agents especially opposition members and NGOs. Therefore
if theatre is hijacked for political purposes, it can also be a dangerous
tool for fostering racial polarization. Programmes in the electronic media may have unintended effects either way, whether positive or negative. For example, in South Africa when blacks have memory in talk shows about forced removals, pass raids, armored vehicles gunning down children Whites feel threatened.23In Zimbabwe, events in the electronic media about the colonial injustices are sometimes even resented by the Blacks themselves because they feel that such programmes are being used in bad faith by a discredited Black government that has nothing to offer to most social groups now except drawing its legitimacy from the fact that it waged the liberation struggle that brought about majority rule to the country.( see ZBC News at 8pm, the Looking Back section). In any of these settler states the liberal and independent media should be allowed to play a crucial role in promoting reconciliation as long as it also recognizes the importance of all social groups in society. Whites in these societies have nothing to fear, they have to accept that what happened is now history and understand that no people can simply forget and start a new life as if living in a vacuum as many of the victims are still reeling from the trauma of colonial injustices, pain is still with them and it may be there for many years to come. So programmes in the electronic media should not be used for political purposes but be there as history, as pride to all "new", reformed social groups that at last goodness has triumphed over the dark past.24 Turning back to the importance of theatre, Mda argues that a true theatre of reconciliation will not shy away from addressing the past, not neither for its own sake nor for the sake of feeding the victim syndrome or making perpetrators lead a constantly guilt ridden life but addressing the past solely for the purpose of understanding the present, hence the need for reconciliation. Thus reconciliation can only succeed if there is a community dialogue at all levels and the vehicle of such dialogue are the products of culture, both at interpersonal and at mass level to reduce polarization tendencies.25 In South Africa, there have been problems in the Rugby game with Blacks alleging that they are being sidelined not on the basis of merit but of color or race. According to Andy Colquhoun, when The Springboks Rugby team won the World Cup in 1995 and the forgiving and shrewd President Nelson Mandela presented the trophy to the team captain, the moment was a potent symbol of weaving together of South Africa's disparate racial threads. More than that, it appeared to have hastened the task at a speed far in excess than of any other medium. For the Springboks manager Morre du Plessis, what happened around Rugby in 1995 proved that it is possible to unite all South Africans in a common cause. However by 1998, the Springboks team which had won 17 victories was still composed of white players only, not representing the country's "rainbow" population of which 81 percent is made up of Africans, 9,6 percent Asians, 6,2 percent are whites with the Coloreds making up 3,2 percent of the population. Efforts are however being made to introduce a quota system in the team that will see specific places being reserved for both blacks and whites on "merit without bias".26 In Namibia, a situation similar to that in South Africa's Rugby was also taking place. For example, in 1999, seven clubs out of fifteen teams in the Namibian National League resigned in frustration at what they perceived as overt racism of the largely White Namibian Rugby Union (NRU). To resolve the impasse, a Black replaced the White NRU president and a quota system has been introduced to accommodate both Black and White players. Interracial teams are encouraged in this region so as to truly represent all social groups found in these countries.27 Therefore, the resolution of racial conflicts in sporting activities shows that it is possible to solve such disputes in every part of society this requires patience, understanding and tolerance as it can not be done and completed just overnight as some may wish. RECONCILIATION IN ZIMBABWE
On the 1st of January 1979 Robert Mugabe assured the White, Colored and Indian communities of Rhodesia that they had "absolutely nothing to fear as long as they stand for true democratic principles, equality, non-racialism, justice and fair play…We are not fighting white people but a racist regime." On the eve of independence in 1980, Mugabe urged all Zimbabweans to
These were some of the speeches that were made by Mugabe calling for reconciliation. Mugabe further argued that the examples of Whites like Guy Clutton-Brock and his wife Molly together with other Whites like Garfield Todd who fiercely opposed racism and supported Blacks' cause made it easier for Him and his colleagues to forgive whites.29 To many people, nationally and internationally, this was unbelievable. This portrayed Zimbabwe as having a potential of being an oasis of racial reconciliation and economic and social progress and Africa's potential giant. Writing in 1990, de Waal questioned the basis, on which this commitment and appeal of reconciliation was made, what grounds Mugabe had for confidence that the ordinary people who had such long standing grievances would heed and support him?30 Back in 1981, Mugabe responded to a letter from David Coltart (now opposition Member of Parliament) then a student at Cape Town University in South Africa assuring him that he was welcome to return to Zimbabwe upon the completion of his studies, urging him to fear nothing citing the government's policy of reconciliation. Twenty-two years down the line after independence, Mugabe was quoted as saying of the same Coltart and other whites:
What went wrong, what happened that made Mugabe's government to be so anti white after very encouraging words that raised the potential of Zimbabwe to become a racial oasis and an economic and social success story in Africa in general and Southern Africa in particular? For G. Stiles, Mugabe seems to have realized the disaster that resulted in the loss of White farms and industry in Zambia and Mozambique in the 1960s and the 1970s and that is why he took a conciliatory stance at independence, not because he really wanted Whites to become part of Zimbabwe. He only cynically needed their inputs to the economy to support the country's social reform system.32 What is clear is that the conflict is over the unequal land distribution that favored the minority whites and has remained not corrected almost twenty years after independence. The fact is that the government took much longer to embark on a land redistribution exercise. The government blames the Lancaster House Constitution that tied the government to "willing seller willing buyer" clause to be used in the redistribution exercise for the first ten years after independence. In 1992, the government of Zimbabwe passed a Compulsory Land Redistribution Act that was basically a "high sounding nothing" because it boiled to nothing and even before then the government was being criticized for distributing land to the ruling elites instead of the deserving landless people. Writing later in 1998, Rev. Sebastin Bakare argued that during the colonial period, settlers and their regimes dispossessed Blacks of their land, but "today they have been joined by the ruling elites in dispossessing the peasantry" and argued that the failure to distribute land will mean that the land reform will remain merely a political rhetoric and the landless will continue to be impoverished and even slip into greater poverty.33 Former Zimbabwean President Rev. Canaan Banana had also expressed a similar view in 1997. He warned that the longer the land question is left unattended to," greater the risk we run of creating social upheaval of unparalleled proportion." He stated that he still maintained the view held by many Zimbabweans of all races who felt that the land resettlement programme had been poorly managed as the landless seemed to have been the least beneficiaries of the resettlement programme.34 Therefore there is serious need on part of the Southern African leaders to come up with effective land redistribution policies early enough to avoid a destructive racial conflict and haphazard land redistribution exercise like the one in Zimbabwe that is not promoting reconciliation but is increasing racial polarization and accelerating the country's economic decline. What is currently happening in Zimbabwe is a sign that racial reconciliation has not succeeded. As noted in the historical background, conflict in one country in the region quickly spreads across boarders because of similar conditions. Similarly, the racial conflict in Zimbabwe has also spread to South Africa where only ten percent of the Country's 41.32 million people own over 80 percent of the country's land resources. Since the dismantling of apartheid in South Africa in 1994, about 1500 white commercial farmers have been murdered as land hunger intensifies and robbery cases increase.35 Although the situation has not deteriorated in Namibia where an independence settlement similar to that in South Africa was reached in 1990, the ordinary Namibians have demanded that their government responds swiftly to their demands for land. Meanwhile, the government of Namibia already has already put in place a programme to buy land for redistribution to the landless peasants, much against the will of more militant elements who believed that land should just be expropriated like in Zimbabwe. Namibian President Sam Nujoma has also been heard at times threatening Whites like Mugabe of Zimbabwe.36 The danger of such threats is that they raise the emotions of the landless and increases their hate of the Whites leading to physical attacks that the governments may be unable to control. At the end of the day the society that is build is one that is characterized by mistrust between races and this is not good for the socio-economic prosperity and political stability of the country and the region as a whole. For the Minister of Agriculture to argue that the White farmers are now irrelevant to Zimbabwe shows no tolerance for any of their contributions and a good sign that their security is no longer guaranteed, the government can not protect them in case of physical attacks by the landless some of whom now believe that they have been granted all the powers to do whatever they want to get land.37 One can therefore argue that the tense racial conflict over land in Zimbabwe is a sign that reconciliation in the first place never addressed the source of racial conflict, that is, the inequalities between races in land distribution and economic opportunities. According to Rev. Banana, the problem of poverty "cannot be left to the conscience of each individual to solve…this is a social problem and must be solved by social arrangements".38 This points to the need to purse reconciliation that will lead to the prosperity of the settler states and the region as a whole, not destructive programmes that will lead to even more suffering of the majority poor. ROLE OF WHITES IN RECONCILIATION IN "SETTLER STATES" Terence Ranger argued that when one evaluates reconciliation in Zimbabwe, a key problem of the early 1980s Constitution was that the "white" identity continued to be legally defined and "white" interests continued to be legally protected.39 This among other things, made it difficult for whites as individuals to play a significant role in the reconciliation process. de Waal in 1990 questioned whether too much was conceded during the Lancaster House conference and to what extent was the hand of friendship grasped and the offer of reconciliation been reciprocated. It has been argued that those whites that took Mugabe at his word found it all too easy to settle down as if no real change was expected of them. Such Whites, according to Banana have remained largely secure in their privileged economic positions over Blacks because of their huge capital investments and will always remain an economic elite.40 Writing in 1997, Banana sounded a warning-like prophecy that has become
true. He argued that yet just because they (whites) are an economic elite
without political power, and are ethnically identified, they were in fact
more vulnerable than perhaps they realized." They must be careful".
Recognizing the fact that they have not been victims of reverse racial
reconciliation has lulled them into what may turn out to be a false sense
of security." They tend to think that nothing is required of them
that they do not have to make much effort to alter their attitude."41 Concerning the role of the whites it would appear that the Whites adopted a wait and see attitude and took the new government's confusion in policy issues as a blessing in disguise hence they consolidated their hold on their possessions without any compulsion to distribute whatever they had. As Pierre du Toit argues,
One cannot therefore expect the Whites to voluntarily surrender their property and can thus argue that there was and still is need for the ruling governments in settler states to come up with economic policies that facilitate the distribution of wealth, policies that satisfy at least all social groups in these states. The ruling elites should avoid the temptation of embezzling the wealth for themselves instead of distributing it to the majority poor. When that happens, the ruling elites may then set the poor Black against the Whites arguing that their failure is due to the Whites' lack of co-operation like what happened in Zimbabwe, a claim that may not be true to a larger extent. For Mafeje, the so called "affirmative action" is a sop to the aspirant Black-petit bourgeois and has no bearing in empowering the majority poor as it represents an insignificant number of Blacks (not more than 15 000 in Namibia, 50 000 in Zimbabwe and 200 000 in South Africa). This is also true of the indigenization policies that have tended to benefit members of the ruling elite and their friends.44 For whites to wholly dismiss such policies as "reversed racism" may not help in changing the status quo and may lead to further polarization of races in the country which is very dangerous to the socio-economic and political stability of the country and region as a whole. What may prevent racial conflicts are genuine talks between the government and the Whites, together with NGO assistance on how to solve the wealth inequalities and this should be done at the early stages of the reconciliation process and the government has to take the initiative and not just sit back and expect that the Whites will swiftly take the initiative by virtue of their being the settlers. Leaving the problem unattended to for too long may have destructive effects on the economy when the grievances resurface once again and coincides with a discredited government's bid to remain in power at all costs like what happened in Zimbabwe. According to T. K. Chitiyo, since the ruling party's defeat in the National Referendum of 2000, the Zimbabwean government increasingly began to shrug off its inclusive reconciliation approach and adopted the militant "radical chic" persona of the liberation group it was in 1980 and this has led to serious polarization between the whites and blacks in the country. The ruling party's "gangster chic" rhetoric played to populist sentiments but at the national expense. The government-sanctioned occupation of White-owned commercial farms only tinkers with the agrarian conflict but does not solve it, rather it destroys environmental and agricultural security of the country and the cost to the nation is increasingly becoming unsustainable.45 Lack of clear policies and intentions on part of the government may hamper effective communication and failure to deal with the source of racial conflict leading to relations characterized by fear and mistrust. Chitiyo also argues that conflicting political statements that oscillated between militancy and conciliatory rhetoric aggravated the land crisis leading to a diplomatic rift between the Zimbabwean and British governments.46 The real challenge in Southern Africa is therefore the promulgation of economic policies with minimal destructive effects during the transition period while maximizing constructive and developmental aspects so as to realize real fruits of reconciliation. Expelling the White communities may be a sign of policy and reasoning bankruptcy and is tantamount to "reversed racism" very much undesired in the twenty-first century. As Web Du Bois argued,
Du Bois further argued that
Therefore, all racial groups found in Southern Africa should accept that this region has become home to all of them and they should work together to ensure its success. BLACK TO BLACK RECONCILIATION IN SOUTHERN AFRICA Former SADC Secretary General Simba Makoni argues that reconciliation in Southern Africa has largely been projected as between Black and White ignoring the Black-to-Black aspects that may even be more detrimental to the socio-economic stability of the region. Among the Blacks themselves, there are latent hostilities to each other resulting in dissident wars and inter-party rivalry that are products of lack of genuine intra-black rivalry in the post-independence era. In Namibia, activists want the ruling SWAPO to come clean on alleged abuses of human rights as many Blacks regarded as spies are believed were killed in detention camps. Politicians scorned the Council of Churches in Namibia for organizing a conference to patch up reconciliation. When the German Lutheran Pastor Siefreed Groth wrote the Walls of Silence detailing the atrocities, he was branded a liar and a traitor but now the situation has worsened with the victims demanding compensation and country's President Sam Nujoma is uncomfortable with conducting truth commission.49 Calls to establish a Truth Commission were also held in Malawi, a country with a very bad history of human rights abuses with reports indicating that state enemies were fed to crocodiles. In Zambia human rights activists are calling for the exposition of abuses allegedly committed by former President Kenneth Kaunda and the Chiluba government's track record.50 In Zimbabwe the "honeymoon" after independence did not last long as the long-standing strains in the coalition of the two nationalist parties, ZANU PF and PF ZAPU soon surfaced. Joshua Nkomo's ZAPU was sacked from government after being accused of harboring dissidents in alliance with the disgruntled members of the white regime. In a fight that ensued, the Mugabe government unleashed its Korean trained fifth brigade on Matabeleland and Midlands provinces (mainly occupied by the minority Ndebele ethnic group) resulting in the murder of more than 15 000 civilians. Beating and rape were exacerbated. Black women were raped and abused by both White and nationalist armies during the war of liberation in the 1970s and were again abused after independence by the government's army and the dissidents and so to them it was a double tragedy. At independence Mugabe told them "forgive your enemies" but soon after independence his own army became the main perpetrator of untold violence.51 To such women reconciliation sounds hollow, they consider themselves cursed and unwanted, with no place in this world. Only their close family members can help in counseling them and urge them to live on despite what happened. When the Catholic Justice and Peace Commission exposed the atrocities in Zimbabwe Mugabe denounced the subsequent Bishop's Pastoral letter of concern calling them " a band of Jeremiahs" and " sanctimonious prelates" hitting back at being criticized for abuses of human rights and for failing in the policy of reconciliation.52 Mugabe has never officially apologized for what his government did and it appears that the Southern African government would use the TRC's alleged failure in South Africa to spurn calls to probe their past. In South Africa, from the mid 1980s Inkatha (later Inkatha Freedom Party
IFP) launched a sustained and a violent campaign against force that were
resisting the apartheid state leading to the murder of an estimated 20
000 people. Evidence elicited by the TRC exposed extensive collaboration
and conspiracy between the IFP, the Afrikaner Right Wing, the South African
Police and the apartheid security forces. However in classic spirit of
reconciliation former South African President Nelson Mandela appointed
IFP leader Mangosuthu Gatsha Buthelezi Minister of Home Affairs and always
appointed him Acting President on various occasions.53 THE ROLE OF CHURCHES IN RECONCILIATION Rev C. Banana also argued that in the past theology has not sufficiently taken into account the political dimension; it has been complacent about political, social and economic structures and concerned itself only with private life and values. The church argues that the hardness and difficult of reconciliation does not lie in its representing an almost impossible Christian ideal but stems from the basic unwillingness to face fear in oneself, not only the fear of hate done to them and the way of life to which they are accustomed but fear of their own unacknowledged capacity for violence and conflict with others. To recognize and confront those fears is fundamental in reconciliation.56 As mediators in many conflicts, individual Christians and churches as human institutions are not exempt from the temptation to play safe and to invite others to do change on. If they are to speak meaningfully about reconciliation they cannot ignore its shadow side, that is, conflict of presuppositions of interests and political aspirations if there is to be a prospect of real peace. The greatest failing of the churches in reconciliation is that they have always tried to make peace and to pretend that peace is possible when the underlying issues have not been generally resolved. In the political and economic spheres, these are general issues of social justice that can lead to a sustained healing of wounds.57 Churches have however been very instrumental in dealing with trauma cases. Racial integration in schools can also promote reconciliation. For example, with the establishment of majority rule in 1964 both the new states of Malawi and Zambia not only outlawed racial discrimination but also dismantled all racial separate schools, hospitals and residential areas and other such amenities.58 However in the settler states of Southern Africa the wide economic disparities between the whites (economic elites) and the majority Black poor has made it possible the continuation of private schools, hospitals and other clubs that the majority poor Blacks will never dream of ever patronizing because of the exorbitant prices needed to maintain such institutions. The nationalization of such institutions cannot be a good idea because of the settler states government's incapacity to run such institutions. The memorandum issued by the Minister of Education in Zimbabwe in 2002 ordering all schools bearing so called colonial names to change them in preference of local national liberation heroes really contributes nothing towards racial reconciliation but only increases mutual distrust and suspicions between the different racial groups. MEMORY AND TRAUMA IN RECONCILIATION Trauma has both a medical and psychiatric definition. According to the National Institute of Mental health, medically, trauma refers to a serious bodily injury, wound or shock. Psychiatrically, it assumes a different meaning and refers to an experience that is emotionally painful, distressful or shocking, which often results in lasting mental and physical effects. Psychiatric trauma or emotional harm is essentially a normal response to an extreme event. It involves the creation of emotional memories about distressful events that are stored in the structures deep within the brain.59 Allen and Bloom in 1994 argued that psychological trauma can be described as an emotional state of extreme discomfort and stress resulting from memories of an extraordinary catastrophic experience that shatters the individual's sense of vulnerability to harm. It involves feelings of intense fear, helplessness, loss of control and threat of annihilation. Trauma fundamentally disrupts the individual's relationship with the world and can have both short and long term effects.60 Many victims and sometimes perpetrators of violence in Southern Africa's settler states, that is, South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe were left reeling under a lot of traumatic experience that needs to be addressed if reconciliation is to lead to healing. In these societies many children and women were made to watch when their parents and spouses were being killed or raped. In South Africa, there is a Trauma Clinic at the Center for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) where victims of violence undergo counseling.61 According to M. Reddy, a past that has been marked by acute violence
hovers over identity, often times emerging to succumb individuals to the
present. Traumatic memories can be hidden but never forgotten. Remembering
and forgetting are constant individual choices (made consciously or unconsciously)
and can quite easily be manipulated by leaders for political objective.
The experiences of traumatic events under sustained periods of violence
are the "hauntingly possessive ghosts" that lurk over everyone
"possessing each according to his or her histories as survivor, perpetrator,
witness or complacent bystander."62
This points to the difficulty faced by those on the losing side (former perpetrators of violence, more so if they also lost their loved ones fighting for a cause that they now realize was not worthy to defend. There is also need to include such kind of cases in the reconciliation process if reconciliation is meant to benefit the whole society. In Zimbabwe, one Canaan Hunda, after his release from a three year imprisonment admitted that he felt angry, ready to kill the Whites, admitted the wound was still there but frustrated at first by Mugabe's call not to take revenge, his anger had gone only because they were now free. This was a common story among many victims of colonial violence.64 This shows that official declarations of reconciliation often attempt to bring closure through silence and forgetting. Wounds remain and this may be dangerous if politicians revive the pain for political purposes. To deal with trauma and memory in Zimbabwe, two Jesuit lay brothers after independence organized what was called "crying retreats" for people mostly women who had been through most horrible experiences like watching their husbands being mutilated alive. The first day or days were spent summoning the courage to relive what had happened and to let the emotions that had had to be inhibited flow freely at least, only then could the talking start and the rebuilding begin.65 In Zimbabwe, the Cold Comfort Farm established in an Anglican Mission became a better place to observe the working out of the policy of reconciliation after 1980.The White family of the Clutton-Brocks shared on equal footing the life of the people with whom they lived, learning as well as teaching, helping to build a community in which all could co-operate, contribute their gifts and skills. Most workshops on the farms were run by ex-liberation fighters and the Cold Comfort Trust always invited groups from South Africa, lawyers, journalists, businessmen, women's organizations, teachers and students from universities to visit Zimbabwe and see for themselves that there could be life after apartheid. The farm thus provided a kind of economic empowerment that was contributing to the healing of the past wounds.66 In South Africa, the Amazwi Besifazane (Voices for Women) Project attempted to engage an oral archive in its attempt to develop a craft/creative mechanism that could be emotionally and physically empowering. The project gathered South African women from urban and rural areas that had experienced the trauma of apartheid asked them to create a record of their experiences through embroidery, appliqué and beadwork with the support of various women's organizations and other interested parties. The "memory cloth" produced since the year 2000 has increasingly became the basis of the historical archive that in the absence of any formal recording process became an important gesture towards holding a fragile history together. The archive helps to construct individual and collective identity. Two aims of the Project are that it eventually becomes an empowerment vehicle with the "memory cloths" marketed internationally and locally and that proceeds will be used to establish a Trust fund that will be established for women to participate.67 For A Honwana, healing goes beyond the alleviation of traumas and includes the mending of the social divisions both within and between communities. The cultural understanding of health and healing are important because the way people express and interpret their afflictions are very locale-specific. It would be wrong to paint a picture of homogeneity among the diverse communities. Moreover, the power of spiritual entities remains paramount in both causation of trauma and in community-based approaches to healing. It is by means of spiritual understanding that people can restore meaning and a sense of balance to their lives following traumatic experiences.68 There is also a need to monitor the transition from private memory and public testimony and the challenges that victims face when they present their traumatic experiences in the public. There is also need to consider how memory, body and place are interrelated,
how memory is used to serve a political purpose. Sometimes trauma experience
may be represented in artwork, movies/drama plays, artists and literature
work. Sometimes such work is funded/sponsored or even produced by Whites
themselves. Artwork, drama plays artists' work and literature work can
thus be used as tools for raising awareness and advancing reconciliation. Racial conflict in Southern African settler states poses a serious threat to the socio-economic stability of the region as a whole. The conflict in Zimbabwe has seriously reversed the gains that had been made since the attainment of majority rule in 1980.The main source of racial conflict is the inequality in wealth distribution that was promoted by the colonial and apartheid regimes in the region and still has not been resolved by the post colonial governments. For effective reconciliation there is need for genuine dialogue between the races and the involvement of NGOs and other donors in the empowerment of the majority poor especially in the settler states as the Southern African countries do not have the capacity to solve their problems on their own. The ruling parties in these countries are encouraged to come up with vibrant policies that will facilitate the re-distribution of resources to the deserving poor, not to amass wealth for themselves and their friends. Chaotic redistribution of resources like land in Zimbabwe that does not foster racial reconciliation but widens polarization and does not lead to economic prosperity is detrimental to the region's socio-economic and political stability. Theatre can also raise awareness and promote reconciliation like in South Africa. State-sponsored theatre that widens racial conflict like in Zimbabwe raises populist sentiments that may be politically expedient for the ruling party but very costly to the nation's socio-economic and political prosperity. Zimbabwe now, instead of being an inspiration in South Africa, has become a fearful warning because of the costly racial conflict. The racial hatred that has been fomented by Mugabe and his government mayl take long to subside. The shadow of Zimbabwe now hangs over the whole region. An explosion of a racial conflict In South Africa and Namibia could easily wreck the already fragile economies and political stability of the region. There is a Greek proverb quoted by Pliny in Latin and when interpreted
to English means "There is always something new that comes out of
Africa."69 One can also not help but hope that there is something
new that will come out of Southern Africa's settler states, something
positive about reconciliation, not something similar to Zimbabwe where
reconciliation faltered at a time when the whole world was still hopeful
that the fruits of a rare reconciliation process were about to blossom.
As Rev. Banana argued, Southern Africa as a whole is one of the richest
and resourceful regions of the world, in the qualities and skills of its
peoples, black, white, colored, its fertile lands and minerals and so
on. The potential is there, has long been there but is frustrated only
by greed and mistrust.70
ENDNOTES BIBLIOGRAPHY
|