Africa and Russia/Ukraine Conflict: Forgetfulness of Our Global Placement.

By Takura Zhangazha*

The war between Ukraine and the Russian Federation is a very international one.  At least where we look at its impact on global diplomacy, allegiances and its global economic impact. With echoes of the Cold War and its global polarisation effect. 

Africa, and its general placement in international relations has had limited little say in this growing international conflict.  Except where it has found itself being cornered (at least diplomatically) to demonstrate where its loyalties lie via United Nations (UN) General Assembly votes. Some of which have been glaringly apparent either via abstentions, affirmations and rejection of specific resolutions against mainly the Russian Federation. 

A process that has definitively divided Africa and the African Union (AU) member states based on specific loyalties, assumed political values and economic interests. Although this is yet to reach a crescendo. 

What has however been more interesting are the African conversations of this most recent ‘global’ conflict.  And these are conversations that have had what can be considered a three pronged process. 

The first was the realisation of the racism that is retainable during a war and about black immigrants.  Social media in Africa at the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine was awash with narratives of the racism experienced by African students studying there.  Even as they were fleeing the conflict, narratives by these students indicated gross racial discrimination as they were enroute to safer countries and awaiting their repatriation home.  The discourse was also however complicated in relation to the surprising number of African students who were actually in Ukraine and how in some instances some embassies were saying that even though they had painstakingly managed to leave Ukraine for neighbouring countries, some of the students were not keen on returning home.  What was however quite apparent was the fact that even in conflict, the latent racism still reared its ugly head.  Even if it did not cause the conflict.  Something that we appear to have quickly forgotten. 

The second strand of conversations about this particular conflict by us here in Africa was more of dramatization.  Almost as though we have been commenting on an ongoing movie.  Conversations around the final winner of this war between Russia, Ukraine, the USA or Europe are abounding.  And as they are also mixed up with sporting team bans (Chelsea football club anyone?) Or extended economic sanctions wither way between the East or the West.  These are narratives that reflect how we may probably be viewing ‘war’ as a spectacle.  Even though we have experienced enough of it ourselves and know full well that war is never the answer.  This is partly how before the advent of social media we viewed the global media’s coverage of the West’s ‘War on Terror’ in Afghanistan, Iraq.  And even the more recent wars in Libya, Syria, Yemen and aborted coups in Venezuela and defeated ones in Bolivia. With the one in Libya leaving us smarting slightly because South Africa which was a member of the UN Security Council at that time allowed the imposition of a no fly zone over the country, a development that enabled what obtains today. 

The third element of the conversations that we are having as Africans on the Ukraine/Russia conflict is that of what I will refer to as ‘preference and admiration’.  Every time there was an announcement of a UN General Assembly vote or UN Security Council resolution on this conflict I would wince slightly.  In a majority of cases we knew which sides our governments were going to take and have taken. Including the reasons why they would do so.  For example, in Zimbabwe’s case it was almost a conversational given that our government would vote on the side of the Russian Federation at the UN.  Based on the history of the liberation struggle, our acerbic relations with the USA after the year 2000 to present and also the fact that Russia and China vetoed a UN Security Council resolution on imposing international sanctions on Zimbabwe in 2008. But the point that remains clear is that there are preferences of winners and losers to a conflict that essentially we have no key say in.   Even as it impacts on us economically and politically, as geographically far away from it as we assume we are. 

What is however most important in our ongoing and future conversations on this particular conflict is the recognition of the importance of the United Nations in seeking solutions to prevent escalation of wars.  Inclusive of our continental and regional inter-governmental bodies such as the African Union and SADC.  While these bodies, particularly our own are generally derided, they help to keep the peace. Based on mutual solidarity and contextual historical grounding.  What is happening in Ukraine cannot and should never be wished, visited on any country or its people.  But it provides us with a learning point as Africans that we must take our placement in the global world/ international relations much more seriously and understand that even that in the contemporary is not as equitable as it would appear.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com) 

 

Diplomas, Social Science, History, Art as the Base of Zimbabwe’s National Consciousness.

By Takura Zhangazha*

When we went to university in the late 1990s, it was a clear societal status symbol. In at least two respects.  Firstly, what you were studying and its implications for your professional/material future. Secondly, the unique recognition it accorded you, not only because it gave you some sort of ‘payout/student grant income’.  But also accorded you a specific societal status of being a chosen one because of your hard-won/studious or natural intelligence.

It was also a bottle-neck education system that was based on high school academic merit. Via an internationalized examination system as run by the colonial Cambridge education system.  Whereas in the 1980s it was easier to get into the only university, the University of Zimbabwe, with minimal Advanced Level (A level) qualifications and in order to do a particular degree of your choice, in the 1990s it had become much harder to qualify. 

Our tertiary education qualification system had become highly competitive particularly for university degrees.  And it had become increasingly hierarchical.  The more points at A Level one had, the more likely they would acquire a more ‘lucrative’ degree programme at the University of Zimbabwe.   And these were considered to be in Medicine, Engineering, Law, Accounting and Business Studies. In some instances, Economics or Psychology degrees would feature due to anticipation of the expansion the private sector in the age of the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP) as a narrative that was more popular at the time. 

The frowned upon degree programmes, even after qualifying were those that were in the fields of Political Science/Public Administration, the Arts, Sociology, Anthropology and Religious studies/Theology.  These degree programmes were considered the ‘no material future’ sort of academic pursuits.  They were neither fashionable in relation to the pro-private capital narratives of the time neither were they considered to be nationally important.  A point that I will return to later as being an ongoing national mistake. 

The preferred degrees were ones that fitted the economic system in relation to not only prestige but also material income.  It was always assumed within the post-settler economy that if one became or example a medical doctor, engineer, lawyer they were destined to be part of a particular elite section of society. By way of class and lifestyle. 

What was not noticed by the state/government at that time (1990s) was that such a class system was failing due to increased rural-urban migration based on desires for recognition of urbanized material progress via education. 

And this did not end at university level.  The multiple polytechnic and teacher training colleges remained harbingers of this same stated link between academic progress and recognition of material success.  From journalism, marketing, teacher training, journeyman, fitter/turner through to nursing, motor mechanics or agricultural diplomas. 

The particular catch became the fact that in our national tertiary education policies, assumptions of superiority of the university degree did not understand numerical realities for the future..  The assumed top notch degree programmes were always going to be overwhelmed by those that were considered inferior. Be they degrees or national diplomas. 

And this is where the key issue re-emerges.  Our bottle neck education system of the 1990s through to the early 2000s until after Mugabe expanded our childrens’ access to university education created a compounded national consciousness that appears to have run away from us. 

As at the height of ESAP, we scrambled for degrees that suited the economic times.  And even post graduate ones for that matter.  Except that the economic times were not defined by us.  But the global political economy.  The more degree and other programmes that we had access to, the more we have frowned upon the social science ones in the vain hope of creating a Silicon genius.  

What we have however recognized is effort and continually so.  The one that started with a diploma, now has a PhD or a Master’s degree as it is linked to polarized political recognition. We even had a former first lady that made it appear as though political power and education reflected that trajectory of individual success.  Materially and politically. 

What is however important in the contemporary is the fact that tertiary or as we refer to it, higher education, remains important for every young Zimbabwean.  No matter the course, diploma or the degree. Though it now comes at greater cost to parents or guardians.

Whereas before we would assume specific degrees were a one way course to material success, we now need to recognize the fact that every degree or diploma establishes a base for a specific individual or in rare cases, collective consciousness.  And that in a majority of cases it is the diploma that matters more than the degree.  An issue that we failed in our state post-colonial elitism to understand in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Even if cdes that initially acquired the diploma now have the degree(s).   

All of this however raises an even more important question in the contemporary.  Should we repeat the mistakes of a past where we assumed it was the natural sciences that mattered more in a globalized political economy?  Should we once again relegate the social and artistic sciences in order to fit in?  From my personal perspective, the answer is a basic ‘no’.  Our social sciences remain integral to our being.  Be they in history, culture, journalism, marketing, teaching. political science, sociology, anthropology or religion. And across varying levels of qualification.  Be they certificates, diplomas, degrees, Masters degrees or PhDs’.  That is where we are most human and even equitably competitive and counter-hegemonic (Netflix and chill anyone?)

Now let me return to our national higher/tertiary education mistake.  We assume that our social sciences are of limited consequence in the global political economy scheme of things.  Yet those we envy insist on operas, music shows, museums (where some of our ancestors continue to be exhibited) and narratives that reinforce their dominant hegemonic narrative.  The only thing to be said in conclusion is that where we ignore our own local social sciences and arts, we become a very shallow people.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)