AFRICA: Militarisation has destroyed liberation movements

A greater portion of the African population continues to look agape over the ever increasing totalitarian behaviour of their liberation heroes. From Zimbabwe under comrade Bob (President Robert Mugabe) to Ethiopia under the guidance of brother Meles Zinawi, torture, disappearances and intolerance continue unabated. The masses keep asking but why the sudden change of character from ‘messiahs’ to persecutors? The answer lies in revisiting the liberation struggles in Africa, how they were conducted and which ideology they followed.

The liberation movements were fighting a much stronger enemy. These colonial and ruthless post-independence black governments had the monopoly of the coercive force in almost all forms of military ware. Waging guerilla warfare on them was not only brave but suicidal. The struggles were threatened by black traitors working for the colonial masters who were beneficiaries of the status quo and wanted it maintained. Mistrust of was a virtue because one was never sure who was a spy of the enemy. Naturally, to be able to withstand such environment, a commandist, authoritarian style of warfare was important.

Disciple was necessary for the struggle to prevail. Mistakes could not be tolerated for they could endanger the lives of the liberators. One had to give an order and it had to be obeyed to the dot for efficiency. Consequently, a command and obey-submissive-unquestionable loyalty kind of relationship militaristic in nature characterised the liberation. Violence, as long as it was inflicted on the oppressors, was justified as a sure way to wrestle power from them. And indeed, the strategy won the day. Movements such as ANC, ZANU-PF, and FRELIMO among others, finally took over power.

But it was not democrats that had taken over power-it were guerilla warfare soldiers flying flags of democratisation. There was need for a transition from guerilla conduct to statesman governance guided by civil norms of tolerance and respect for divergent views. From the look of things across Africa, this transition continues to be elusive. The culture of militarism was not transformed at the end of the struggle. The comrades have not taken off their military uniforms even as they occupy state houses across Africa.
The violence that was necessary to oust the oppressors characterises today’s liberation movements turned political parties albeit cosmetically. Thus even with the new political dispensation ushered in by these comrades; nothing seems to change as they are not willing to apply rules of the game in a ‘free’ nation. Indeed, tolerance of divergent opinion, pluralism sound hollow to their ears. The opposition is demonised and dubbed the enemy-an extension of the fallen colonial or brutal regimes trying to reincarnate self. They refuse the simple fact that the conduct and methods of operation in their previous lives of struggle where
orders were the norm, where power was wielded by a clique of commanders- cannot build a democracy. Consequently, all the good ideals that are meant to push the country forward are supposed to be borne by them.

There is no doubt that the culture of militarisation was vital to the aspiration of the movements. But maintaining such notions of behaviour at a time when one is supposed to be a statesman is an absurdity. At the core of their weaknesses has been one factor; militarisation. It is sad but true- just look around you.

Author: James Nkuubi
Source: Daily Monitor, Posted  Monday, April 4 2011 at 00:00

Mr Nkuubi is a social critic emailadress: luyombyajames@gmail.com