allAfrica.com: Namibia: The Challenge of Reconciliation - Lessons for Namibia? (Page 1 of 3)

"THERE is a need for a healing of the nation.

The process of national healing and reconciliation is unlikely to proceed as long as society is still polarised.

In addition, without also addressing past crimes, corruption, marginalisation and poverty, it is unlikely that reconciliation can be achieved."

This insight was presented in the Kenya mission report of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM).

It was submitted by the APRM panel of eminent persons to the continent's Heads of State gathered at the Summit of the African Union in July 2006.

One and a half years later, Kenyan society was traumatised by the worst degree of violence since Independence and its people were more divided than ever before.

The (allegedly orchestrated) civil war-like situation erupted over disputed election results.

It brought to light that beyond the surface of a seemingly peaceful society deep-rooted antagonisms could be mobilised to unleash blind hatred and destruction of property and lives among people who were living in hitherto relative peace with one other.

In such circumstances socio-political stability assumed was treacherous, fragile, and prone to easy manipulation.

Many societies on the continent are confronted with similar challenges.

Since the mid-1990s national reconciliation initiatives emerged in a series of African countries.

These were notably inspired by the widely-praised Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in South Africa, which symbolised the country's collective effort to come to terms with a past still dominating the present with lasting impact also for its future.

Despite all its limitations the TRC was widely perceived as an encouraging initiative and lesson to bring the skeletons out of the closet and to deal with the lasting effects of violence and counter-violence in a public way.

Far from solving structurally-rooted historical legacies and their daily impacts on the life of ordinary citizens, nor able to end discrimination or to bring to task many of the perpetrators, it cast the spotlight on the need to address history in the present.

Similar initiatives were undertaken in other war-torn societies marred by organised repression and forms of mass violence, causing festering wounds and scars among the people.

Notably so, the governments of two former settler societies in Southern Africa did not seek public debates and transitional forms of justice and reconciliation.

Zimbabwe and Namibia achieved their Independence through anti-colonial struggle by liberation movements.

In both cases the final defeat of colonialism was not brought through the barrel of a gun but subsequent agreements between conflicting parties forcontrolled change.

These provided a transitional framework limiting the space for the redistribution of wealth and the transformation of the societies.

As a result of negotiated decolonisation, the liberation movements Zanu and Swapo were elected as legitimate governments and have been in political power and control over the state bureaucracy since 1980 and 1990 respectively.

In contrast to South Africa's ANC, Zimbabwean and Namibian political leadership did not pursue something similar to the TRC.

Instead, they proclaimed national reconciliation as a pragmatic agreement becoming effective with Independence.

This policy declared to leave the past behind without public debate for remembrance and conscious dialogue over the injustices committed (though selective reference to colonial crimes is applied when needed and also commemorated as part of the liberation gospel).

In both societies the justification for casting this kind of official smokescreen over the colonial past was rooted to some extent in the argument that the repressive machinery of the colonial occupation was staffed and executed by many who at the dawn of Independence could no longer be held accountable.

Either because of a large-scale amnesty declared for opponents on all sides of the conflict, or because some of the worst abusers of human rights had retreated to their British or South African countries of origin.

web allafrica.com	Enter your search terms	Submit search form
OR subscribers use AllAfrica's premium search engine


Use our pull-down menus to find more stories