Owei Lakemfa reports…………………….
There is a wounded lion on
the rampage in Africa. Before the attack on him, President Pierre Nkurunziza of
Burundi and his pride had killed at least fourteen people, injured over two
hundred and sent tens of thousands scampering into exile especially on the
shores of Lake Tangayika and into Rwanda.
I was in neigbouring
Rwanda, and there was a lot of concern about the situation in Burundi and the
influx of refugees. But on Wednesday May 13, 2015, the news of a coup to topple
Nkurunziza spread. I was worried that it was the Army, because, in African
history, the Army, which is generally neo-colonial, complicates matters. Moreso,
in Burundi where it had been split a decade earlier.
The coup attempt, led by
General Godefroid Niyombare, failed and a triumphant Nkurunziza rode into
Bujumbura, seeking and exerting his pound of flesh. Even unarmed protesters
were treated as armed rebels.
Any country I visit, I have
a habit of talking with various strands of society. When I was in Bujumbura in
January 2014, I tried to probe into the political under current, and discovered
that political tension was not far from the surface. Yes, there were attempts
at reconciliation and national rebirth, but it was a far from settled polity.
That was why I thought that the President’s divisive decision to run for
another five-year term which resulted in mass protests from April 26, was ill
advised.
As we say, in this part of
Africa, it is clear that Nkurunziza has ‘no home training’ or ‘was not properly
brought up’. Indeed, the models of leadership in the Africa of the late 1960s
to the early 1990s were mainly cranky soldiers who after seizing radio
stations, shot their way into the presidential palaces.
But why do so many African
leaders cling to power even if it is detrimental to the interests of their
countries? Some have argued that the post-independence model of Western
democracy we adopted, is alien to African culture. That Africa tends to be
monarchical. Indeed there are many African leaders with the mindset of ancient
monarchs; people who want to rule to eternity and then get power passed to
their sons. These are the cases of Gnassingbe Eyadema in Togo who ruled for
thirty eight years, with his son, Faure taking over; and Omar Bongo who ran
Gabon for forty one years before his son Ali, took over.
There was of course the
farcical drama played out in the Central African Republic where on December 14,
1977 at the Bangui Stadium, President Jean-Bedel Bokassa changed the country
into an ‘Empire’ and crowned himself the Emperor. He sat on a golden throne
shaped like an eagle with wings outstretched, wearing a crown with a 138-carat
diamond worth $2 million, and apparels costing $5 million. The entire ceremony
set the impoverished country back by some $20 million. Three years later, the
clearly demented man was overthrown.
Despite these, it is untrue
that Africans are wedded to monarchism because we are not more monarchical than
the Europeans.
On the other hand,
Nkurunziza may be suffering from messianic hallucinations; that is, leaders who
believe that without them, their countries cannot survive. This may be why we
have dinosaurs as leaders in many countries. Leaders like Zimbabwe’s Robert
Mugabe, Angolan, Jose Eduardo dos Santos, Paul Biya of Cameroun and Uganda’s
Yowerei Museveni who have ran their countries, an average of 33 years apiece,
abound. But the example of Nelson Mandela who despite his cult-like
followership spent only one term in office, smashes the myth of messiahs.
The Third Term Disease
which President Olusegun Obasanjo tried to infect Nigerians with, is actually
an Ebola-like infection. This is why African leaders who were quick to condemn
the coup attempt, also have the duty to call Nkurunziza to order. Why would a
leader endanger the good health and well-being of his country by clinging to
power? But I am not confident that they or the African Union (AU) would be
willing or courageous enough to tell him the truth.
Although the AU has removed
the clause of ‘Non- interference’ in the internal affairs of member countries,
but the mindset has not changed. In practice, the military intervention of
Tanzania under Mwalimu Julius Nyerere in Uganda in April, 1979 which sent
clownish Field Marshall Idi Amin into the dustbin of history had destroyed that
provision in the OAU/AU Charter.
So why don’t African
leaders tell themselves the truth? Jeramogi Oginga Odinga, one of Africa’s
outstanding post independence leaders told me in an interview I had with him in
Zanzibar twenty two years ago, that the OAU is actually a trade union (club) of
African leaders where they protect themselves from the African people.
Burundi which became
independent on July 1, 1962 has been quite unfortunate. Its political volcano erupted
in September 1972 during which between 200,000 and 300,000 Hutus were killed
and another 300,000 fled into exile. Sixteen years later, some 150,000 Hutus
were massacred in clashes with the army. The 1993 assassination of President
Melchior Ndadaye, led to a decade civil war which the February 28, 2005
Constitution tried to resolve. It was under that constitution that the then
Good Governance Minister, Pierre Nkurunziza became president for a five-year
tenure. He was re-elected five years later for a final second term, now he
insists on a Third Term. His reason is that it was the Parliament, not the
general electorate that elected him president for his first term.
Nkurunziza may be
technically right or wrong in his argument for a Third Term, but is it worth so
much bloodshed and instability for his country? Is his ambition worth the blood
of Burundians? An Idi Amin might have insisted in running, no matter the costs,
but definitely, not a Nelson Mandela.
One reason why leaders like
Nkurunziza fester on the African continent, is the lack of Social Movements
comprising workers, students, the informal sector, conscientious intellectuals
and other progressive forces who can bring pressure to bear on the AU or any
African leader.
Owei Lakemfa
Interesting!
ReplyDelete