By Takura Zhangazha*
Former liberation movements that are also ruling parties
recently held a summit in South Africa. They
were hosted by the current African National Congress (ANC) president Cyril
Ramaphosa.. There were also at least three other Southern African Presidents
representing their ruling parties. These
were Daniel Chapo of the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO),
Nandi Ndaitwa of the South Western Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO) and Emerson
Mnangagwa of the Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front (Zanu
PF). This event was also attended by
former presidents Thabo Mbeki (ANC) and Joaqim Chissano (Frelimo).
The exiled leader of the Western Saharawi Republic and the Palestinian
Liberation Organisation (PLO) were also represented.
The theme of this meeting was dubbed “Defending the
Liberation Gains, Advancing Integrated Socio-Economic Development,
Strengthening Solidarity for a Better Africa,”
Normally this meeting would not have attracted actual
presidents. It would have been largely
viewed from the perspective of party functionaries such as secretary generals
or administrators and heads of party international departments.
But there is now an evident sense of concern from these former
liberation movements that are still ruling parties.
And they now have a five year programme of action in which they
have instructed their respective party administrators and treasures to, among
other things, prioritize the following:
1.
“Defending and consolidating the gains of our
liberation”
2.
“Confronting imperialism, neo-colonialism and
geo-political subversion
3.
“Charting a radical new path of socio economic
transformation driven by grassroots mobilization, regional integration and
people centered development”
Normally this would be almost ‘run of the mill’ token
resolutions of these former liberation movements that are still ruling
parties. Except that international
global relations and economics have shifted significantly in the age of Donald
Trump, the Ukraine-Russia war and the genocide that is happening in Palestine,
particularly in Gaza.
All of which are occurring within the conundrum that is their own domestic/national electoral cycles where they have to contend with emerging opposition political parties and leaders that are a direct threat to their hegemony.
Mainly because of a lack of continual
liberation struggle history consciousness across generations and also the
inherently stubborn hegemonic post-colonial intentions of the global north or
as we traditionally refer to it, western European and north American countries.
In this mix is also the cultural dynamic that comes with
Africa’s demographics of a much more youthful population than anywhere else in
the world. So ‘age’ becomes a key
political tool for the former liberation movements to contend with, even in
their assumptions of their infallibility and internal power succession
plans.
In Botswana this was made evident in their last elections
where the former liberation party Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) lost the
presidency to the new Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC). In Mozambique the former liberation movement
Frelimo had a close and contested call against the Optimist Party for the
Development of Mozambique (PODEMOS).
Tanzania’s Chama Cha MaPinduzi (CCM) has an election this
year (scheduled for October 2025) and the former liberation movement and ruling
party has been accused of trying to unfairly repress the mainstream political opposition
Party for Democracy and Progress (CHADEMA).
Against the backdrop of their recent summit, it is evident
that former liberation movements are smarting from the losses of their peer
parties from the anti-colonial struggle.
And are therefore trying to shore up their liberation history struggle
solidarity to retain power as current ruling parties.
That they cite interference in electoral politics by
external forces and colonial interests in the mineral wealth of the Southern
African region is indicative of not only what they know to be their precarious political
existence but also their own long-duree internal and national performance legitimacy
weaknesses.
Inclusive of how they are now accused by a relatively
populist, religious, globally malleable and celebrity culture motivated young
Southern African population. A youth
demographic that does not prioritize liberation and anti-colonial struggle
history. And one that lives in the material moment.
So these former liberation movements that are also still
ruling parties are faced with an existential dilemma. One that is historical and global.
With the first question being, can they electorally retain power
within the ambit of electorally accepted universal democratic norms? Or can they risk losing power at the behest
of the same said universal democratic best practices and norms?
What their statement indicates from their recent South
African meeting is that they are still willing to risk it in terms of democratic
best practice when it comes to retaining political power. But ensuring that they assist each other as
long as they are still ruling parties. Both
in relation to funding for elections but more significantly about an emerging
urgent requirement for solidarity where elections are contested globally and
internally in the countries that they still rule.
It is a very complex situation for them as former liberation
movements that are still power. And it is understandable that they are
reflecting on this. Except for the
reality that they still have to be democratically re-elected every five or six
years by what is now a very fluid and young electorate.
Whereas when they came to power, anti-colonial and
liberation Pan African ideology really mattered. Now it has been thrown to the periphery
because of their own weaknesses around performance legitimacy and the global
neoliberal tide as led by the west.
Now and in conclusion, this is a very complicated argument to make. The former liberation movements that are still ruling parties in Southern Africa need to re-examine the placement of the region in global history and acknowledge their own complicity in the fact that there are younger voters who do not like them.
They also need
to understand that changes in global economics after the Cold War is not on
their ideological and cultural side. Nor is the passage of time and desire for
progressive political change. And neither
is social media and our long standing Diaspora with global north experiences
and understanding of the ‘good life’ on their side.
Because of this, they may need to reinvent themselves much
more organically than they have done to date.
But ordinary Africans also need to ask themselves questions as
to the meaning and interaction of the history of liberation and contemporary African
politics. Including how we are where we
are in our collective ahistorical gullibility.
And the wars that reflect the coloniality of the global west that in most
tragic circumstances we do not query because of our false and shallow admiration
of the lifestyles of the global north.
The former liberation movements that are still ruling
parties may need reminding of that famous Julius Nyerere dictum, ‘The mechanisms
of democracy are not the meaning of democracy”.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity
(takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment