South Africa’s Changing Political Climate

Jacob Zuma and the African National Congress

A few things about ANC and Jacob Zuma. The recent presidential victory of Zuma seems to indicate that ANC has stepped away somewhat from the politics of compromise with Imperialism. The Young Communist League, the Congress of South African Trade Unions and other formations have gotten behind him in a big way. This represents a departure from the legacy of Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki, who were more behind building a substantial black middle class rather than working on behalf of the masses.

Because, in recent times, the African National Congress has not lived up to its words. As a student activist in the anti-apartheid struggle, the organizations that I participated in typically brought in Azanian Peoples Organization (AZAPO) comrades or those from Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC-A). This was because the ANC had strong liberal support from the NAACP and the white left, for example, and the other groups became marginalized. Also, AZAPO and PAC-A had vibrant Pan Africanist politics. They discussed how they not only attacked apartheid infrastructure, they also fought SADF troops and armed boers on the ground. The ANC had a policy of not hitting “soft” targets, despite the massacres white nationalists perpetrated against the African community. Now when the apartheid system released Nelson Mandela from 27 years imprisonment on Robbin Island, he scrapped the long-time demands that ANC had promised to the African masses.

Mandela’s freedom was bought for a price. Mandela veered away from the Freedom Charter; he served up the masses to a neo-colonial State which became entrenched in Imperialism. Winnie Nomzamo Mandela, his wife, walked him out of prison and Nelson walked her into prison because her politics diverged drastically from the sell out brand that he had cultivated over many years, as AZAPO comrade Mongezi Sifika-Nkomo has stated.

Prior to Mandela’s release, a wave of killings swept South Africa. This time, it was political violence masquerading at a political level. Remember the necklace, a weapon used against police agents and informers? Well, the ANC adopted it to terrorize AZAPO and PAC-A veterans. The Pan Africanist line held by these groups was that the land belonged — not to ‘all who live on it’, as the ANC Freedom Charter states — to the African masses. These freedom fighting groups had declared that the black workers and peasants own the mines and all the land. This declaration jeopardized the ANC position.

So ANC declared war on their political allies. Shortly afterward, the boers used Inkatha Freedom Party to wage a successful war of attrition on the ANC. This brought the ANC and Mandela to the table on white power’s terms. Afterwards, Mandela’s presidency opened up opportunities for rich white mining operations such as Anglo-American and Rand to expand into the rest of Africa. South Africa paved the way for “post-racialism” and the US is somewhat tailing that model.

During this period, huge “gold rushes” sparked intense wars over their mineral rich deposits of diamonds in Sierra Leone and casseterite/coltan in Eastern Congo. The profiteering done on a large scale during those wars has not contributed towards raising the living standards of African people despite the individuals who apparently live like leeches on the backs of the struggling masses. This is a direct by-product of South African “post-racialism.”

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, constructed by Mandela in partnership with his apartheid bosses to allow racist butchers to escape extremely serious charges concerning their heinous abuse of humanitarian rights. The South African Defense Force had been implicated in genocidal crimes ranging from direct military support and assistance of Renamo and UNITA, two vicious counterrevolutionary formations, to atrocities carried out in the townships and refugee camps against noncombatants.

The documentation on these activities is extensive. SADF carried out assassinations on people like ANC leader Chris Hani. Their jamming equipment brought down the Soviet aircraft shuttling Mozambican President Samora Machel from peace talks in Nkomati, Tanzania, where Zimbabwean and Tanzanian leaders had proposed to Machel that they form a triple front to end the Renamo depredations in northern Mozambique. The South African government, not knowing the outcome of those talks, decided to kill Machel in a manner resembling an accident. These are some of the serious crimes that the SADF and its political leadership have escaped, even while the entire economic sector in South Africa continues to be dominated by international finance capital. Thabo Mbeki carried on the Mandela policy.

International finance used the SA Tarzan sector to push the family of economic apartheid’s long-time Malawian lackey, Hastings Banda, into top leadership positions in Zambia. The Bandas have helped set the stage for destabilizing Central and East Africa.

Now, today, tho, Jacob Zuma apparently represents a sincere break with the politics of collaboration. The ANC “subsystem”, as it has been called, is being dismantled for a more radicalized vision of what South Africa should be. And this is as it ought to be. While a number of black middle class forces sought to divide the ANC and form a breakaway formation, Zuma craftily held it together and expanded his base. He restored confidence in the ANC by strengthening its core values, and taking steps to move away from Imperialism. Various charges used to slander Zuma had been dismissed and discredited. This was a tactic to stop the trend towards collectivization, towards strengthening the unions, and towards building a revolutionary component inside South Africa.

Africans cannot be dispossessed on their own land; they cannot be forced to live on that 13% of land set aside from the period of colonial domination. The boers will have to sink or swim. Zuma seems to be bringing in a new day. Forward the Black Revolution in Southern Africa!

Not Every American Is Ready For President Obama

After the dominant community found Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s comments about the racial relations between blacks and whites so inflammatory, many have proceeded to punish Barack Obama. As a member of Reverend White’s church Barack Obama must support everything that Reverend Wright said. People act like no one would ever be a member of a group and disagree with leadership. For example, the idea that everyone that is an American must agree with everything that President George Bush does and says is as wrong as they come. Barack Obama has publicly denounced what his former pastor has said. However, there are so many people using Mr. Wright’s inflammatory but true comments as a means to beat down the African American candidate. People wanted Mr. Obama to denounce his former pastor and his friend. Too many people say that because Mr. Obama didn’t knee jerk and kick Mr. Wright like an extra point that Mr. Obama is not fit to lead America.

Personally, I found Mr. Obama inspirational. I was prepared to see him do the typical politician shuffle where he simply kowtows to the whims of the dominant community with the white mindset. I expected Mr. Obama to make his speech in front of the podium and do an impression of Bill Cosby and say something to the affect that the black community isn’t doing enough to make the statements of people like Reverend White a thing of the past. I fully expected Barack Obama to come out and say, “God damn America? God damn America? God damn the black community!” to voracious applause from a national audience that wants to see this black man, like many black people who are successful, prove his devotion to the status quo and to prove his willingness to separate himself from his black audience.

But Mr. Obama didn’t kick his pastor out of his life. In fact, he respectfully disagreed with his friend and spiritual mentor and downplayed their difference of opinion. He could no more disassociate himself from Mr. Wright than he could disassociate himself from the black community. That’s nothing Bill Cosby would have said. That’s nothing Oprah Winfrey would have said. That is nothing Tiger “I’m an AnythingButBlackian” Woods would have said. That is nothing that a lot of high profile black people who have been embraced by the dominant culture would have said. Mr. Obama had the courage to stand before the world and say that the solution is not the expedient dismissal of the black people who share a bitter sentiment. The solution is to come together and put the dysfunctional racial relationship we have on the table so we can get through this once and for all.

Good god! Why in the world did he do that?

Suddenly the white mindset realizes that this isn’t some Jell-O pushing black man running for president. This guy admits to being part of the black community. The last time I checked, Mr. Obama was losing political ground to his rival Hillary Clinton. Ms. Clinton had opened up a seven point lead in approval ratings over Mr. Obama. The implication is that the national community isn’t ready for any real racial healing. Mr. Obama didn’t condemn his friend hard enough. He didn’t denounce his friend fast enough. He didn’t distance himself from the inflammatory remarks far enough. He didn’t appear non black enough. A black man in a black church with leadership that talks about black issues means that he is trying to assert a black agenda on America. Mr. Obama would destroy white privilege. White people would never belong to a white church. Never mind the fact that white people belong to spiritual organizations like the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Polish National Catholic Church, the Ukrainian Greek Church, or the German Orthodox Jews. No one would make the argument that these spiritual organizations are the strongholds of white only sensitivities although they are void of any sizable black population.

Many people in America don’t want a candidate that is ready to heal race relations. As far as the dominant community is concerned, race relations are fine the way they are. If they weren’t they would’ve been changed years ago. If the dominant community had a problem with black subjugation they would never had institutionalized slavery and condemned black people to a second class status. It is not a problem. As far as the white mindset is concerned everybody needs to quit acting like race is a problem in this country. It is because of this tolerance for racial disparity that the dominant community becomes surprised to see black people frustrated to the point displayed by Reverend Wright in the video clip that has so thoroughly captured America’s extremely short attention span.

As far as the white mindset is concerned the way to heal race relation is to get black people to quit bitching about disparity. Nobody is doing anything to hold black people down. All those things like keeping black people enslaved while white people accumulated wealth, keeping black people classified as only three fifths human, keeping black people away from the voting booth with various Jim Crow laws, keeping black people separated from the white community with various segregation laws, denying black people civil rights, incarcerating black people for crimes that barely get a slap on the wrist for white people, using black people for syphilis studies, etcetera, etcetera, and etcetera.

Black people just want special treatment. And every year the America Congress has to deal with trying to balance a budget wrought with earmarks worth hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars sourced from special interest. It looks like special treatment is the American way. It works for the oil companies, it works for defense contractors, it works for big manufacturers who export their jobs overseas, it works for communication companies, the rich people get the lion’s share of tax breaks that average well over two hundred fifty thousand dollars per billionaire and millionaire, and a lot of other entities are doing well because politicians are taking care to treat them special. Everybody wants special treatment. But black people need to feel ashamed for wanting to be treated fairly, the attitude is fairness for black people is in itself special treatment.

Now that Mr. Obama has proven that his commitment to the black community is just as strong as his commitment to the white community he no longer is the most appealing candidate many people thought he was. Suddenly, Hillary Clinton and even John McCain appear much more appealing as the president. I’m not surprised. Suddenly, I find Barack Obama a much more appealing presidential candidate for the very same reasons. Ms. Clinton and Mr. McCain are more than committed to keeping the status quo. Mr. Obama should have remembered that the only black people who do well are the black people who pretend not to be black or who are demonstrably not affiliated with the black community.

Mr. Obama has shown that he’s not going to automatically absolve white America of its collaboration in the overall condition of the black community. He is not going to say white people have done enough and the black community needs to do its part. I thank Mr. Obama for having the audacity to stand by the black community. Too bad there are so many people in America that aren’t ready to face the dysfunction of our nation’s race relations enough to want a candidate that appears genuinely ready to do something about them. And in all honesty I seriously doubt if some of us ever will.

November Carnival Submissions: “Reparations:what is the value of what we’re owed?”

Thanks to those who participated. Additions are welcomed and respectful discussion is encouraged. As always, if you have an idea for a future Carnival topic, let us know at Afrospear@hotmail.com.

Jamelle discusses what reparation’s mean and more importantly, how we should really conceive of reparations at The United States of Jamerica.  

Hathor argues that the public needs to understand the impact of slavery before reparations can be discussed at Hathor-Sekhmet.  

Aaron sees the reparations movement as engaged in an unwinnable political contest and nothing more than a distraction and diversion at A Political Season. 

Brother Pruitt lays out a blueprint (or should it be called “blackprint”) for his vision of the reparations movement as a guest blogger at Second Book of Asabagna.

International Justice in the Shadow of Truth and Reconciliation

I was never a proponent of “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions” in adjudicating crimes, especially crimes involving human rights abuses and atrocities during armed conflicts,  such as torture, rape, kidnappings, murder, etc. The idea that a perpetrator of these crimes could just come forward and receive amnesty for telling the truth of their participation in these reprehensible acts and then ask and receive forgiveness, to me was a not only a devaluing of the ideal of justice, but also of human life. Especially African/Black life! I found my opinion on this issue somewhat of a paradox since I am strongly influenced by Christian ideology about forgiveness (but the quote by JFK more reflects my real stance: “Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names”), but as a law enforcement practitioner, I also strongly believe that one should be accountable for one’s actions, and criminals acts should be punished. 

I first became aware of this concept being put into practice after the white South African apartheid government came to an end in 1994. To my knowledge, it has been used also in Rwanda, Liberia and Sierra Leone after their bloody civil wars. I am also aware of the reality that not everyone received amnesty through this process, although due to political and civil stability, some of those who should have been prosecuted (and executed) went free. I am talking here more about leadership figures who started, encouraged, perpetuated, ordered and even participated in these crimes. In the case of South Africa for instance, former presidents F.W. de Klerk and P.W. Botha, both received amnesty, although de Klerk apologized for the sufferings caused by apartheid, while Botha refused to appear before the commission calling it a “circus”.

Various international criminal tribunals and courts have subsequently been established to prosecute government and military leaders who were involved in crimes against humanity, genocide and other war crimes. Currently Liberian ex-president Charles Taylor, is being tried by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague, Netherlands, on 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. A former Rwandan army major was just convicted of his role in massacre of 10 Belgian U.N. peacekeepers in 1994, at the start of the Rwandan genocide. These various international courts and tribunals currently have outstanding warrants out for ex-presidents of Chad and the Central African Republic, five leaders of the Lord’s Resistance Army in northern Uganda; a janjaweed leader in Darfur; a Sudanese government minister; a Congolese warlord; is it only me or is there a certain pattern emerging here, hmmmm….  Granted there are warrants out for some former Balkan leaders, but their capture is being hampered more by political interference and back room dealings, than by not knowing where they are currently hiding…. and for the record, as one who does not easily believe and/or ascribe events to conspiracy theories, even I found that it was way too convenient for former Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic to abruptly die before being sentenced by ICC.  

Interestingly, one of the countries which refused to recognize the legitimacy and jurisdiction of the ICC was the U.S.A. There was a concern (more like a fear) on their part, that the court would/could be used to bring U.S. government and military leaders to trial. I am no legal scholar, but would these acts individually or collectively, be considered worthy of prosecution by the ICC:

1. lying to start a war to topple a hostile leader who was a former ally;
2. creating a situation of chaos, destruction, mass murders and civil war in the said country;
3. encouraging the imprisonment and torture of said citizens who were not charged with any crimes and using the former prisons and torture chambers of the former dictator;
4. establishing a prison in a foreign country for those deemed “enemy combatants”; and amid allegations of torture, hold your own military tribunals to try these “enemy combatants”, while there are constitutional challenges at home and outcry from the international community;
5. kidnapping of individuals and “renditioning”  them to countries, where your allies sense of justice and adherence to human rights are questionable at least, but are more often than not: non-existent! Or better yet… send them to secret prisons that you have set up around the world to “vigorously and/or aggressively” interrogate them;

As someone who has friends and acquaintances who have suffered at the hands of Charles Taylor and his armed forces (primarily gangs of boy soldiers), and the Sudanese Islamic government, I am all for bringing any and all those involved in “crimes against humanity” to justice. The leaders should be tried and punished (executed where applicable). I do however see a place for “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions”…. to address the actions of those, like the boy soldiers who were physically and psychologically coerced, as well as being filled with drugs (mixtures of cocaine and gun power), to engage in atrocities. I understand that there are no simple solutions to this issue, especially since the procedures and practices of justice, like history, are wriiten and controlled by those in power.