Disclaimer: Content on the YP4 blog does not necessarily reflect the views of Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation. The views, ideas, statements or claims posted on this site by members of the public cannot in any way be attributed to either Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation.
hope and change in 2008 politics
peace without sickness, failure without denial, and democracy without restriction
Hope and change have gained a great footing in not only the 2008 Presidential elections in the US, but also in the communities of Northern Uganda. Peace talk negotiations and a cease-fire in fighting have allowed children to return home, families to rebuild, and communities to begin creating lives without fear from conflict. The conflict in Northern Uganda is often tagged as a "civil war," but largely centers on a rebel group called the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA). (Read more here) Thousands displaced, abducted, lost - hundreds killed. The peace talks have been going well and two weeks ago (April 10th) Joseph Kony, leader of the LRA, was supposed to come out of hiding to sign the peace agreement. He did not show up and his spokesperson claimed he had been sick. Sick or afraid? Kony and his top officials are now on the top of the International Criminal Court's arrest list. It seems he may have been sick with fear of being held accountable for his long-running violent resistance.
The election count in Zimbabwe has been delayed. After many have called for the results to be released from the election, electoral officials have decided to recount 23 out of the 210 seats. This will take 3 more days. There is fear that the recount will include vote-rigging, something that would not be new in Zimbabwean elections under Mugabe. It is well known that the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party has gained the majority over Mugabe's Zanu-PF party. There are fears that the recount could reverse that majority. Hope for change in Zimbabwe is stalled yet again and there is no guess as to when election results will actually be released. Now hundreds of opposition supporters, fleeing "state-sponsored" violence, have been detained. Most will be charged with inciting election violence as the scapegoats for Mugabe's government response to political opposition.
Opposition candidates have been arrested, people stayed away from the polls, rising cost of food and decline in wages have lead to a popular discontent with the Egyptian government. People are more concerned with getting bread on the table than on turning out in the polls. The main opposition party in Egypt has been officially banned and their candidates have been arrested and detained so that they cannot campaign. The hope for change has been squashed by the current government, but not without at least some opposition. The Muslim Brotherhood, with its candidates banned, boycotted the elections and clashed with police. There is fear in the government that they will lose more support to the "pro-Islamist independents" who seem to have the backing of the people. The US is not the only country where the rise in power of Islamic groups has produced an unfounded fear and caused actions that are far from democratic.
Kenyan politicians have reached a deal to allow a coalition government. Mwai Kibaki will remain President and his opponent, Raila Odinga, will serve as Prime Minister. It is not clear how the people will react to this evolution. The next major task of the coalition government is to work on relocating the hundreds of thousands of displaced peoples as a result of their "election" or move to power. Nearly 140,000 people are living in tents and depend on food handouts to live. Adding difficulty, there is disagreement in the parliament as to what actions should be taken first: returning the displaced or preaching co-existence and reconciliation. The historical rifts in Kenyan politics will need to be handled as soon as possible if Kenya is to move forward with the stability of the past.
In all four cases there is an extensive past to learn in order to fully understand the current situations. Each case represents a direct outcome of former colonial systems perpetuated (especially their failures), oppressed populations, and a push for democracy that seems to be historically flawed in its practice and exportation. Hope and change may just become buzz words for the 2008 election year, but they also have the great potential to live up to the aspirations of many looking for a new way of handling governments and societies.
From the When not in Africa. . . blog.
- Alex B. Hill's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Awesome Post
Alex, I also wanted to ask you what you make of the comment about " direct outcome of former colonial systems" which I think is a wonderful observation intellectually but I think it merely serves on a practical sense to perpetuate the many governmental failures that these countries in Africa eventually succumb to. Growing up in Africa I can say that indeed the legacy of colonialism is very conspicuous but my fellow scholars always censure me when I say that when we attribute societal failures purely to the "legacy of colonialism" we actually destroy the level of accountability that most of these countries should have in governing their countries. I think what we are doing when we attribute much of what is wrong in Africa we do something similar to having two kids fight and the fight was instigated by an adult and when those two former kids grow up and actually gain a level of consciousness they end up still fighting again. So my basic question is don't you think that some of these problems in Africa should at the highest be attributed to the failures that Africans themselves succumb to, because another Kenya or Rwanda can happen in my country ( Zambia) where the legacy of colonialism has economically favored the Bemba ethnic group over the rest and my ethnic group (tumbuka) have a hold on capital flow on the lusaka Stock Exchange, but should we still reasonably justify what happens as a legacy of colonialism... because then if that is the case Africa is a ticking time bomb waiting for one Hitler to come and excite some deep seated sentiment.
( this is an area I greatly differ with many professors at my university, hence my extensive comment).
succumbing
To say that people in African countries succumbed to colonial institutions is to say that Europeans did not carry guns. The conquest of Africa and the subsequent takeover of the systems within Africa occurred because of technology and a hold on power. Europeans were able to penetrate the African coastal regions because of their advancements in technology in transport and weapons.
Arguing that Africans succumbed to colonial powers is very problematic. Portuguese soldiers were the first Europeans to set foot in Africa, from there missionaries and adventurers spread Western ideas of racism, the inadequacy of black people, and their need to be saved from their own plight. Following behind the missionaries came the military conquests to claim land and resources. The first systems established, after military conquests, were police and military. The systems that are in place now grew from a base in violent conflict and dividing and conquering.
Ethnic differences were exploited, people were separated by class, and no where did Africans have agency in colonialism. You give a perfect example of your ethnic group holding economic power as a result of the colonial system. There is no reason that, to a degree, Africans should be held to some standard (not the West's) and should be supported in fixing past colonial wrongs. The actions of many African elites cannot be tolerated. Where colonialism has placed power, the elites have run with it. Many of the indigenous political and economic systems in African have been the most human focused and democratic. These systems should not be a forgotten part of Africa's past.
- Challenge yourself everyday, if you don't then it is a wasted day.
Indeed, I do agree with
Indeed, I do agree with what you have wrote but I think for me it has to do with the fact that most of these problems though very much rooted in the historical realities you have mentioned in fact have mushroomed into something that is just different. And I always think that certain flawed structures within the system unfortunately leads to most of these governments to fail and those who instigate the whole thing know that they can easily attribute the problems to colonial legacy. So, I would imagine that the well intentioned scholar who actually brings these problems in fact hinders what needs to be done. It is like in the United States when we point to the legacy of slavery as an indication of certain structural flaws in our society that serve to perpetuate what slavery initially did; but that is a very big difference than actually having objective routes for individual development and when the person fails they take out the " race card." I guess for me it is more about accountability rather than the social or economic realities of the particular situation. Often we can site history for why things are the way they are but from a grassroots level it is better to actually see how justifying Rwanda as a colonial manifestation in fact creates a spring board for other countries to do the same in regards to their calculated ethnic cleansing efforts. I guess my whole thing is HOLD these guys accountable and they shouldn't be given the eurocentric card to play because then they end up like Mugabe taking farms that were an impetus to the economic activity of zim-zim and actually giving to people, who actually lacked the technical as economic skills to run the farms.
playing cards
Recognizing the historical context of situations can never be written off as a card to play in response to failure. I know plenty of black people and other minorities who would take offense to someone saying that when they fail, they play the "race card" to get ahead.
For me it is also about accountability, but I am not the one to hold any African accountable and there is no way that I will look past the historic, social and economic realities. You refer often to the Rwandan genocide, but what happened there was not written off as a result of European colonialism. Leaders were held accountable, criminal courts were involved, and efforts for reconciliation were started to combat the past divisions of colonialism. No one said, "since colonialism has created this, no one will be held accountable."
If you want to hold someone accountable for their actions, say a genocidaire from Rwanda you have to understand the historical context that created the situation that led to a division of power, oppression by leaders of their own people, and eventually a genocide. Once that context is understood that doesn't mean that you can let someone off for killing hundreds of thousands of people. The Nuremburg trials determined that no matter who has commanded you or influenced you, you still have your own free will to take the actions of your choice. History has never given anyone a free card to play.
In Rwanda, and many African contexts, the perpetuation has come in the form of educating the youth. When you start to teach a child to hate a certain group, they will have a prejudice for the rest of their lives. That is why the reconciliation programs in Rwanda are focused on bringing young people together to break those prejudices and dialogue.
- Challenge yourself everyday, if you don't then it is a wasted day.