South Africa

In what has to be among the most disappointing news from southern Africa in a long time, the Southern African Development Community (SADC) has chosen to acquiesce to Robert Mugabe’s rule. A meeting that beforehand was hailed as preparing to take a stance against a regional despot instead ended up asking “The West” to ease sanctions and engage in dialogue with Mugabe. Almost dumbfoundingly, the meeting called “for the lifting of all forms of sanctions against Zimbabwe”.

Perhaps most disturbingly, SADC also appointed as mediator South African President Thabo Mbeki. Implicitly South Africa has continued to advocate a “silent diplomacy” that in the end would result in Zimbabwe’s betterment. Instead what we get is a ratification of the same. Let these words ring through your head: “The extraordinary summit reaffirms its solidarity with the government and the people of Zimbabwe.” That’s right. Given a chance to push change, indeed under circumstances in which they all but promised to do so, SADC has declared its fealty to Robert Mugabe. They stared Mugabe eyeball to eyeball. And somehow they blinked.

Imagine the state of the resistance, however divided, in Zimbabwe today. A dictator was validated while Zimbabweans suffer. A dictator was validated, and in the process SADC has effectively given the go-ahead to the oppression of his opposition. A dictator was validated and so SADC failed. And in so doing, SADC abdicated every claim it might have to reponsibility in Zimbabwe. Catastrophe looms. I think it is safe to say that SADC had its moment to help determine the course of contemporary Southern African history. It failed. And it did so egregiously.

One of the mandates of the New South Africa was to try to Africanize many of the names of places and institutions. After all, in that predominantly African country, why would the new, non-racial democracy want to perpetuate the names of the heroes of the white regime, the very people who had disfranchised Africans, who had perpetuated segregation and brought it to its apogee with apartheid? South Africa has eleven official languages and one of the goals after 1994 became to give each of them greater representation.

And so slowly but surely names changed. The very structure of the country shifted with the transformation of the four old provinces to nine new ones, some with names such as “Limpopo” and “Mpumalanga.” Universities and schools and public facilities changed names, often to honor liberation heroes, at other times simply to symbolllically transform those facilities into something more indigenous. Pretoria took on the name Tshwane, though many in the country still refer to it by its old name.

The process of revisiting nomenclature has not always been an easy one. Language and names are powerful cultural forces. When a movement emerged to change the name of Rhodes University, the “Oxford on the Veld,” arguably the most Anglophile institution in all of South Africa, the backlash was fast and fierce. The titular foundation of the school, based on that most emblematic of colonial settlers, Cecil John Rhodes, endured. Rhodes University’s problematic name lives on where so many others gave way.

So it is not entirely surprising that naming continues to be a source of controversy. In June 2003 Arts and Culture Minister Pallo Jordan ordered The northern Limpopo town of Louis Trichardt to change its name to Makhado. A group of businessmen brought a case against the name change. In an earlier decision they lost, but today the Supreme Court of Appeal reversed the decisions of lower courts. Makhado is once again Louis Trichardt.  

So who was Louis Trichardt? He was a Boer leader of the Voortrekkers, the intrepid Boers who left the Cape Colony to stake out their own claim to South Africa’s frontier. The Great Trek of the 1830s is at the center of the great founding myth of Afrikanerdom and Trichardt is one of the apodictic figures in that mythology. The myth of the Trek fueled the myth of Afrikaners as a chosen people. And of course a central aspect of this mythology is the white supremacy that came to characterize to much of Afrikaner society, especially in the political realm.

Trichardt, whose expedition took him all the way to Delgoa Bay (what is now Maputo, Mozambique), died of malaria along with nearly two dozen other members of his expedition. His name lived on largely because he was the only major Great Trek leader to have kept a diary.

I am not one to deny a people their history, their legends, even their blemishes. But given the role that the Great Trek played in establishing Afrikaner nationalism, and given the role that Afrikaner nationalism played in establishing apartheid, I’m not sure that the New South Africa has any responsibility to continue to commemorate those whose legacy served to perpetuate, refine, and perfect the highest stage of white supremacy. Louis Trichardt died deep in the heart of Africa. Perhaps it is time that the town named after him let that name die as well.   

The New York Times has a feature on the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s adjustment to its election six months ago. Not surprisingly, a half a year has not done much to overcome decades of misrule. Congo has long stood as the emblematic example of African chaos. It is far too early to be optimistic about this vast swath of Central Africa, but stability in the Congo would provide a reassuring sign.

The Washington Post’s travel section recently emphasized Africa. Among the countries featured were Zambia, Namibia, and Angola.

First off, I want to apologize if any of you feel as if I have allowed the crisis in Zimbabwe to hijack the South Africa blog. But all along I have cinceived of this as a blog about Southern Africa, with South Africa at the center. Right now the events in Zimbabwe are arguably the most salient on the continent outside of Sudan, and as long as that is the case, I’ll feel a sense of responsibility to cover that crisis wherever it leads.<p>

In potentially explosive move the 14-nation Southern African Development Community (SADC) on Monday called for “an extraordinary summit” in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania. Southern African leaders have scrambled to change schedules to consider Zimbabwe’s crisis.  SADC intends to deal with the crisis that Robert Mugabe has wrought in his reeling homeland. There is talk from former information minister under Mugabe and now opposition leader Jonathan Moyo that Mugabe is facing his last days. Moyo has talked about possible coups and how Mugabe’s back is against the wall.

It is certain that the region’s leaders intend to send a clear message to Mugabe who will have his chance to respond but who must feel as if the vice is squeezing. Knowing this, before he took off for Tanzania Mugabe today had Morgan Tsvangirai, the Zimbabwe opposition leader who was brutally beaten by Mugabe’s police last week, arrested with a number of other opposition members.

As Moyo points out, it is unlikely that this summit will end with any sort of ultimatum or even harsh words of condemnation. That tends not to be how SADC works even when expressing displeasure with one of their own. But the message will be clear. Mugabe will have to clean up the mess he has made or he will become an official regional pariah and he will no longer be able to expect even begrudging support from the region. They will encourage him to retire. Perhaps they will find a way to allow him to do so without losing face. recently there were indications that Namibian President Hifikepunye Pohamba might be willing to provide Mugabe with a cushy exile.  Such a solution might not represent the ideal outcome for those who might want to see true justice done, but now is not the time to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Members of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have broken their silence on Zimbabwe. Regional cooperation all along has presented the greatest hope for promoting change by taking the responsibility away from individual leaders such as Thabo Mbeki. Traditionally regional leaders, with memories of colonialism on the ground and the manifestations of apartheid and similar policies still fresh, have advocated solidarity. This always made sense inasmuch as the threat from without was always greater than that from within and as long as those threats hoped to find weak spots by weakening that solidarity. But times have changed and the threat in Zimbabwe most certainly does not come from without.

Last week:

 Zambia’s President Levy Mwanawasa, currently deputy chair of the SADC, broke ranks with the regional body to admit that “quiet diplomacy has failed to help solve the political chaos and economic meltdown in Zimbabwe,” and even likened the country to “a sinking Titanic whose passengers are jumping out in a bid to save their lives.”

Acknowledging the gravity of the recent outbreak of violence in Zimbabwe, he said Zambia had been forced to re-think its position after “the twist of events in the troubled country”, which “necessitates the adoption of a new approach”.

Leaders in Lesotho and Tanzania appeared set to join Mwanawasa last week as they met in Maseru, Lesotho’s capital, to try to get to grips with the regional response to Mugabe. In recent weeks Mugabe’s capacity to use regional loyalties against what he perceives as outside imperialists has begun to founder on the realities of his erstwhile allies.

At the same time, opposition forces within Zimbabwe continue to stand up against the flailing regime.  Some Zimbabweans continue to speculate about a future without Mugabe. The old tyrant is unlikely to step down anytime soon, and some analysts fear that violence will escalate leading to the inevitable crackdowns. But if regional leaders can continue to develop a backbone and if the internal opposition refuses to be cowed, maybe, just maybe Zimbabweans will be able to look to a future free of Mugabe. The walk to freedom won’t be easy but at least a path is beginning to reveal itself. 

The Boston Globe has a powerful story about a soccer field in Rwanda. Here are the first two paragraphs, but read the whole thing:

In Kingston on Boston’s South Shore, the Jonathan Rizzo Soccer Field with its bright lights and bleachers is a fitting memorial to the young man who loved the game and played on his hometown teams. In a barren refugee camp in Rwanda, seven time zones away, there’s another Jonathan Rizzo Soccer Field. There are no lights or bleachers, but there’s a clear space carved out of a mountain ridge, plus equipment and uniforms for the children, many of whom don’t own a pair of shoes.
The field in Kingston was built by contractors with a grant from a foundation in Jonathan’s name. The field in Rwanda was built by Nick Rizzo, who picked the spot and helped clear the land as a tribute to his older brother, who was murdered in July 2001. Nick recently spent six months working in the dirt-poor country, leaving Harvard University for a clogged refugee camp.

This is a touching tribute to love and redemption. If you have a brother and you are reading this at work you might have to tell your coworkers that it has gotten a bit dusty in your office or that your allergies are acting up.

Happy birthday, Marcus.

(Crossposted at dcat and at Ephblog.)

The situation in Zimbabwe continues to deteriorate. Another opposition leader has told of her travails and worries for her health if she is not allowed to leave the country and the governor of the country’s central bank has announced a crackdown on illegal fuel dealers in hopes of stemming one source of the country’s rampant inflation. But there is hope that South Africa will begin to take on a more prominent leadership role in confronting the crisis.  

On the same day that Pius Ncube,  Zimbabwe’s archbishop, accused the South African government of failing to use the power at its disposal to force Mugabe’s hand and United States officials appealed to South Africa to act to stem the Zim crisis, signs emerged that South Africa is prepared to act. On the eve of the country’s Human Rights Day (which occurs every March 21, which marks the anniversary of both the Sharpeville Massacre of 1960 and the Langa Massacre of 1985) members of the country’s cabinet expressed their concern  about the crisis across the Limpopo. They called for talks from all sides, including Mugabe, and did not hint at any South African intervention, but even tepid words represent something given the general state of reticence that has characterized South Africa’s policies toward Mugabe’s regime.

Robert Mugabe threatens to expel diplomats who, in his estimation provide “support” for the opposition. Sean McCormick, a spokesman for the State Department, declares that the United States holds Mugabe “personally responsible” for attacks on opposition leaders.  Mugabe increasingly relies on “hit squads” to carry out his dirty work. Zimbabwe’s judiciary still hints at independence and ortders the release of another opposition leader.

These are just snapshots from another few days in Zimbabwe’s increasingly closed society. The Council on Foreign Relations has much more, including many links, on “Zimbabwe’s Meltdown.”

This past Sunday’s New York Times travel section featured Africa. It includes pieces on West Africa, featuring Senegal, night-time in South Africa’s Mountain Zebra National Park, and following the path of David Livingstone’s quest for what would come to be known as Victoria Falls as well as much more.