Daniel Steinmann
23 November 2007
opinion
Windhoek — How does one protect the interests of a group of people for which one cares deeply without falling into the propaganda pit? How does one ensure these people's existence in the face of the massive problems facing Africa, and against the ever-encroaching and inevitable development that is creeping up on so-called tribal peoples' living space?
I am referring to the situation where the last remnants of two small Bushman clans are up against the Botswana government in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve. This conflict has been turned into a farce by the efforts of a UK-based NGO, Survival International. By now, it is common knowledge my view is diametrically opposed to theirs and that I say outright their approach is harming the Bushmen and not helping them.
I oppose them mainly for two reasons: First, - I know they distort they facts and secondly, they are trying to secure a spot for these two small groups by believing their own romantic notion of how Bushmen live, and by building a card house of propaganda based on that notion.
I admire their efforts on behalf of so-called indigenous peoples, but their barrage of propaganda is becoming tedious. In their attacks, they would like us to believe there are two main culprits, the Botswana government and De Beers diamond mining company. The Bushmen are the innocent victims of land-grabbing strip-mining moguls whose only intent is to make a profit.
This is all obvious nonsense, to such an extent that I consider it an insult that I am forced, every time I read their propaganda, to try and present a factual view, at least to Namibians.
I think there are a number of important facts one must not overlook.
The Gana and the Gwi are not separate tribes, they are at most clans. There are many such clans, all part of the San people, in the rest of Botswana, in Namibia, in Angola and in South Africa. One such clan in South Africa recently won a landmark court case to have about 90000 hectares of ancestral land in the Northern Cape Province reinstated to them. Incidentally, this I believe is the way to follow for all these groups.
Furthermore, it is not as if the Botswana government has not tried to reach a settlement with the Gana and the Gwi. They were offered land outside the park, to which they all moved, and then, only after rumours surfaced that De Beers was prospecting for diamonds in their former territory, did relocation became an issue.
Also, it is complete and utter nonsense to try and portray both the Botswana government and De Beers as monsters. Both institutions have sterling records of how they employ diamond revenues to uplift whole communities and an entire country. Nothing could be further from the truth to say that there is some vendetta against the Bushmen.
Then, consider this. The park is not fenced on its southern boundary so there is just as much game outside as inside.
Sometimes of the year, I get the impression there is more game outside the park. This means, as far as a hunter gatherer lifestyle is concerned, there is absolutely no difference between Old Xade and New Xade, the place where Bushmen used to live, and the resettlement town the Botswana government put up for them outside the park.
It is also nonsense that the Bushmen still live a traditional life. They hunt with rifles, (actually this is called poaching if you do it in a protected area), some of them on foot, occasionally on horseback and sometimes even with off-road vehicles. Those Bushmen who returned to the park after they won their court case, were not arrested for hunting in the traditional way, they were arrested for poaching with high-power modern hunting rifles.
And then lastly, I honestly believe Survival's basic assumptions about Bushmen are racist. They want the Bushmen to exist, almost like wild animals in a national park, part of the scenery so to speak.
The Bushmen communities in Namibia are just as much exposed to the horrors of the modern world. This is evident when one observes their exploitation by other indigenous groups, and when one sees how prevalent alcohol abuse is. In Botswana I observed basically the same conditions in several Bushmen villages, all resettled, or should I say, settled since Bushmen are by culture, nomadic.
Survival has one valid point and that is that the Bushmen must be enabled to decide their own future. In this regard I think we are the Batswana one ahead, but this does not happen in isolation. It happens against the background of the aspirations of all the citizens.
It does not single out one group to keep them in a primordial state living like animals in a game park.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2007 Namibia Economist. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
