Post-colonial struggles for a democratic Southern Africa

Legacies of Liberation

Carolyn Bassett, Marlea Clarke

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317430193
• Topic: Política y relaciones internacionales
• Subtopic: Política

National liberation, one of the grand narratives of the twentieth century, has left a weighty legacy of unfulfilled dreams. This book explores the ongoing struggle for legitimate, accountable political leaders in postcolonial Southern Africa, focussing on dilemmas arising when ex-liberation movements form the governments. While the spread of multi-party democracy to most countries in the region is to be celebrated, democratic practice often has been superficial - a limited, elitist politics that relies on the symbols of the liberation struggle to legitimate de facto one-party rule and authoritarian practices. Using country cases from Tanzania, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Zambia, the collection explores three subthemes relevant to postcolonial governance in Southern Africa: how the struggle for liberation shapes the character of political transformation, the nature of rule in one-party dominant states headed by former liberation movements, and the processes of governance and resistance in post-liberation contexts.

This book was published as a special issue of the Journal of Contemporary African Studies.

Legacies of liberation: postcolonial struggles for a democratic southern Africa

Carolyn Bassett^a and Marlea Clarke^b

^a Department of Political Science, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada

^b Department of Political Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

 

This special issue of the Journal of Contemporary African Studies, titled Legacies of Liberation: Postcolonial Struggles for a Democratic Southern Africa, seeks to explore the ongoing struggle for legitimate, accountable political leaders in post-colonial contexts where ex-liberation movements form the governments. The first two articles, by Teresa Debly and David Moore, investigate one of the main subthemes, the struggle for liberation and political transformation, in Swaziland and Zimbabwe, respectively. Three articles highlight the nature of rule in states headed by former liberation movements – all of which are now one-party dominant states – Leander Schneider on Tanzania, Roger Southall on South Africa and Linda Freeman on Zimbabwe. The issue concludes with two articles that use specific examples to highlight the processes of governance and resistance in post-liberation contexts, with Grace-Edward Galabuzi on the privatisation of Zambia’s mines and Richard Saunders on blood diamonds in Zimbabwe.

The origins of this special issue are a series of discussions that began at the retirement of one of the Canada’s foremost scholars of African studies, York University Professor John S. Saul; the theme of the special issue draws on key questions about the nature and legacy of liberation movements in Southern Africa that have preoccupied Saul for the past half-century. Saul has been one of the most knowledgeable, sympathetic and prolific chroniclers of the anti-colonial struggle as it unfolded between the 1960s and 1990s in southern Africa, highlighting problems that plagued many of the region’s liberation movements once they gained political power. Key themes in Saul’s works include the dialectics of leadership accountability and grassroots participation and the challenge of fostering bottom-up, genuinely participatory processes of social change. Though the authors in this volume do not necessarily accept Saul’s conclusions or even his basic assumptions, and in fact not all directly address his writings, they do engage with one or more of these central questions.

Saul has been part of a generation of important western scholars of African liberation politics and perhaps the foremost critical researcher of radical liberation movements in southern Africa. A self-described ‘revolutionary traveler’ (Saul 2009), he not only documented 30 years of liberation struggle in the region, but also sought to actively support those struggles through his writings, his teachings and his ongoing engagement with the region from his base in Toronto, most notably with the Toronto Committee for the Liberation of Southern Africa (TCLSAC). Author of more than 14 authored and co-authored books, dozens of scholarly articles and even more popular articles and editorials on the region, Saul has been able to draw not only from decades of research but also years spent in the region, and a wealth of friends, contacts and comrades to present a strongly informed, sympathetic yet critical analysis of national liberation struggles and post-liberation politics in the region.

National liberation was one of the grand narratives of the twentieth century, yet it poses something of a paradox, because victory in a national liberation struggle is simultaneously an end and a beginning. Southern Africa suffered some of the longest standing colonial regimes on the continent and the struggles for independence from white settler rule proved to be long and bitter. Substantial white settlement in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and Mozambique (and to a lesser extent Zambia, Swaziland and Tanzania) rendered those colonial regimes particularly tenacious (Wilson 1994, 177–197). As recently as 1970, only Swaziland (nominally a ‘protectorate’ ruled by the Swazi king under British imperial authority which was heavily dependent on white-ruled South Africa), Zambia and Tanzania (both of which had seen only limited white settlement) were independent of European or minority white-settler rule (Hargreaves 1996, 200–247).

Many of Southern Africa’s liberation struggles were led in whole or in part by exiled guerilla movements forced to operate in secret military cells that militated against consultation with the mass population, much less democratic participation and accountability. The transition from guerilla movement to political party did not necessarily transform the political culture of liberation movements in any fundamental way. Even those former African colonies like Tanzania and Zambia that did not suffer the depredations of minority rule found the appeal of de facto or de jure one party rule, political centralization and authoritarian decision-making irresistible.

Victory represents an end in the sense that the old oppressive system has been overturned, denied and rejected. But it is a beginning in that what comes next has yet to be determined. By and large, southern Africa’s victorious national liberation movements embraced a strong state and a top-down approach that prioritised leadership and nation building ahead of participation, democracy and voice (Melber 2003). When combined with the (usually) external imposition of economic restructuring programmes shaped by neoliberal norms, introduced in an equally top-down fashion and enforced by international funders and other foreign institutions, the challenge of genuine liberation for southern Africa seems all the more pressing today and yet more distant than ever.

John S. Saul often concluded his sometimes-discouraging analysis with the phrase A Luta Continua – the struggle continues. In many ways, his sentiment offers a way to situate this volume – many of the struggles discussed here are unfinished, in progress, and even, where successful, remain partial and inadequate compared to the monumental nature of the task. Moreover, the special issue is but one intervention in a broader series of discussions and debates on this topic (see, for example, Melber 2003; Southall 2013) and an incomplete one at that. Certain important actors, sectors and issues are entirely absent from this special issue, notably gender and the environment; others are addressed incompletely, and certain countries, notably Mozambique and Namibia, do not feature in the pages here. For this, we apologise and draw your attention to other fine books, articles and special journal issues that cover some of the issues and themes we have missed. Nonetheless, we hope you agree this special issue offers a substantial contribution to the debates on the legacies of liberation, the meaning of democracy in Africa and the significance of mobilisation. A Luta Continua.

Acknowledgements

The editors would like to thank the external reviewer for this entire special issue for being so generous with your time and for your very careful and thoughtful review of all these articles. Your comments, corrections and suggestions for individual articles along with overall suggestions on the special issue were extremely helpful. We are very grateful and thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Hargreaves, John. 1996. Decolonization in Africa. 2nd ed. London: Longman.

Melber, Henning, ed. 2003. Limits to Liberation in Southern Africa: The Unfinished Business of Democratic Consolidation. Cape Town: HSRC Press.

Saul, John S. 2009. Revolutionary Traveller Freeze Frames from a Life. Winnipeg: Arbiter Ring.

Southall, Roger. 2013. Liberation Movements in Power. London: James Currey.

Wilson, Henry S. 1994. African Decolonization. London: Edward Arnold.

Culture and resistance in Swaziland

Teresa Debly

Department of History, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, NB, Canada

This article investigates the current political struggle in Swaziland, focusing on the role of culture in the growing resistance by youth and other opposition groups to the political repression and naked greed of Swaziland’s monarchy under King Mswati III. As this article shows, to date, opposition groups have been thwarted in their campaign for broad, but fairly straightforward, political changes in Swaziland: multi-party elections, parliamentary democracy, increased rights and citizens’ participation in politics. The article explains that the King continues to use (and manipulate) culture and tradition to justify his authority, in particular through institutions like the ‘traditional Parliament’, tinkhundla, and the state investment company, tibiyo. These are, however, not part of ancient Swazi tradition; they were created by the monarchy in recent history to help the regime maintain its authority. To challenge the legitimacy of the king’s rule, the opposition also creatively uses culture and tradition. The article shows how political dissidents have used songs and music, especially at funerals of political dissidents, to ‘re-claim’ culture and tradition in order to keep the struggle for political reform alive.

The Kingdom of Swaziland is often described as the ‘Switzerland of Africa’, which conjures up beautiful images of magnificent mountain scenery and lush green pastures (SIPA 2008, 6). Even place names, such as Ezulwini (the ‘valley of heaven’ – home to the royal family), depict an African Shangri-La. These euphemisms are strictly a ‘view from above’ and used by government, business and tourism offices to present the image of an idyllic place.

Daily life in Swaziland, however, is not idyllic for most people. The country has been, and remains, a very divided and unequal society run by the monarchy. In August 2008, Forbes magazine named Swaziland’s King Mswati III the second richest man in Africa, while the United Nations World Food Program ‘keeps a record 600,000 Swazis alive – more than 60% of the population’ (Republic of South Africa 2008). Also in 2008, the United Nations Development Program reported that 69% of the population lived below the poverty line, while the king had between 14 and 20 wives and concubines, more than 20 children and more than a dozen new palaces (in addition to the one inherited from his father, King Sobhuza II). Further, the country has the dubious notoriety of having the world’s highest prevalence of HIV/AIDS (Lewis 2005, 179). This socio-economic context has fomented a political crisis that has manifested itself in a struggle to define authentic Swazi culture.

At the centre of this political struggle is the country’s monarch, King Mswati III, the last absolute monarch on the continent. When he ascended the throne in 1986, he did so amidst hopes he would rule differently than his father. Swazis imagined there would be positive change because the young king was ‘modern’ and had been educated in England. Yet his ruling style has not deviated from that of his father and his power, if anything, has grown over the past three decades. Like his father, King Mswati III has refused to introduce any reforms aimed at democratisation and instead has used a government-sponsored ideology of cultural traditionalism to justify banning all political parties and maintain a state of emergency. Despite decades of constitutional talks and the introduction of a new constitution in February 2006, political activists and lawyers believe nothing has changed because the king retains ultimate power over the legislative, judicial, executive, economic and security branches of government. His rule can be described as modern authoritarianism, cloaked in traditionalism.

Although Swaziland passed through a century of colonisation to achieve independence from Europe without bloodshed, the authoritarian nature of post-colonial rule has generated significant resistance, including an increasingly visible armed resistance movement. Perhaps more importantly, I argue here, popular uprisings and protests have grown in recent years, with youth and other opposition groups using culture as a way of expressing themselves and challenging the oppressive rule of the king. Indeed, it is this resistance – rather than more traditional tactics used by opposition groups – that seems to be undermining the confidence of the state in the king’s ability to justify his political and economic activities as based on tradition and culture. This article explores these issues by examining the nature of political resistance in Swaziland, specifically its employ of cultural weapons like music, to challenge both the king’s despotic rule and his own use of tradition and culture to smother resistance. If the state’s overreaction to the singing of political songs at funerals is any indication, the Swazi monarchy is feeling extremely threatened by these so-called weapons of the weak and may find it more difficult to continue its authoritarian rule.

The article begins with an overview of the nature of the Swazi state, the regime and the nature of the monarchy. It focuses on two authoritative institutions of governance – Tinkhundla and Tibiyo takaNgwane (Tibiyo) – that are the locus of regime power and of resistance. These two institutions, which are protected by a discourse of traditionalism, enable the ruling Ngwane Dlamini clan to maintain their economic and political grip on Swazi society. As will be discussed below, Tinkhundla controls who can become involved in the political system while Tibiyo controls the ‘wealth of the nation’. Although these institutions nakedly concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the royal family, their real purpose has been masked by the claim that tradition justifies the operation of these institutions.The article then turns to songs as expressions of ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Citation Information
• Notes on Contributors
• 1. Legacies of liberation: postcolonial struggles for a democratic southern Africa
• 2. Culture and resistance in Swaziland
• 3. The Zimbabwean People’s Army moment in Zimbabwean history, 1975–1977: Mugabe’s rise and democracy’s demise
• 4. Liberating development? Rule and liberation in post-independence Tanzania
• 5. From liberation movement to party machine? The ANC in South Africa
• 6. A parallel universe – competing interpretations of Zimbabwe’s crisis
• 7. Land resistance in Zambia: a case study of the Luana Farmers’ Cooperative
• 8. Geologies of power: blood diamonds, security politics and Zimbabwe’s troubled transition
• Index