Connect with us

Insight

The roots of protests in Eswatini

Published

on

Eswatini recently experienced popular protests in large part because of political power structures and corresponding public wealth distribution arrangements that were established during colonial rule, and after the country’s independence, in September 1968.

Under British colonial rule, Eswatini was part of a threesome (known as BLS) of Southern African High Commission Territories, with Botswana and Lesotho.
Although the British started arrangements for granting independence to the three territories at around the same time, Eswatini received its independence two years after the other two, which received their independence within the same week — Botswana on 30 September, 1966, and Lesotho four days later, on 4 October, 1966.

An important part of the explanation for the delay in Eswatini’s gaining of independence was that there was no agreement between the British government on the one hand and Paramount Chief (as he was styled under colonial rule) Sobhuza II on the other regarding a political system by which Eswatini would be ruled after independence.

Put simply, the British wanted independent Swaziland to be a constitutional monarchy, while Sobhuza II wanted independent Swaziland to be an executive monarchy. It was the king’s digging of his hills to achieve this that delayed Swaziland’s independence by two years.
In the end, Sobhuza II largely succeeded, aided by two factors, in particular. Firstly, the fact that he had managed during colonial rule to assimilate traditional power structures and Swazi culture into the system of government.

Advertisement

Secondly, Sobhuza II had remained popular during colonial rule and headed a deeply conservative chieftainship and society — partly, a result of the fact that colonial rule in Swaziland had been brief (60 years, compared to Lesotho’s over 90 years, when negotiations for independence began), and the Paramount Chief and the chiefs had been little bastardised by colonial influences.

In his demands for a post-colonial dispensation that rested power in his hands, Sobhuza II appears to have been driven by a seemingly sincerely-held totalitarian and paternalistic vision in which everything had to be done according to Swazi culture, which put all power – ritual, political, spiritual and economic — into his hands.

Britain’s opposition to Sobhuza II and the colonial master’s attempts to institute a constitutional monarchy for Swaziland enjoyed support of the territory’s small middle class politicians and small working class.
The groundwork that Sobhuza II had laid during colonial rule was too strong, however, for the British to shut Sobhuza II out of power completely. Accordingly, the country’s independence constitution was a compromise that allowed for multi-party democracy, while at the same time reserving executive powers for the king in a number of areas.

Matters did not end there: Sobhuza II also countered, and undermined, multi-party democracy by establishing his own political party.
A political theoretical examination of documents that explain the political system King Sobhuza II wanted would reveal a much more dangerously authoritarian rule than was established, in fact.

In 1973, King Sobhuza II removed multi-party constitutional arrangements by suspending the Constitution, and issued a decree which gave him all power in Eswatini society. This is the dispensation that King Mswati III inherited when he ascended the throne in 1986 following his father’s death in 1982.
Since coming to power, King Mswati has instituted changes in the country’s constitutional arrangements but these have been largely cosmetic and intended to make absolute monarchical rule less unappealing to the eye and ear — with phrases such as ‘monarchical democracy’ — and otherwise intended to entrench the king’s power even further.

Advertisement

Wealth distribution is heavily skewed in favour of a very few among the traditional and modern elites. In September, 2019, BusinessTec put Eswatini at the top of a list of countries considered the most unequal in the world; this portrayed Eswatini as being more unequal, even, than South Africa which often occupies top spot by some reckonings.
Some measurements estimate poverty in the rural areas at 70 percent, and extreme poverty at 25 percent, only 5 percent less than Lesotho’s extreme poverty, at 30 percent. Based on the two countries’ GDPs, Eswatini’s economy is almost twice (1.88 times) larger than Lesotho’s. Accordingly, extreme poverty in Eswatini ought to be 15 percent. Indeed, all forms and levels of poverty ought not to exist at all.

Politically, with the exception of a very few among the ruling group, all social groups chafe under a most pervasive oppression. Challenges to the oppression have occurred, led by various organisations, and supported, mainly, by the working class since 1986.
The state has reacted to all of them with unrestrained brutality intended not only to punish specific individuals and organisations deemed responsible but also to secure the seemingly near-total acquiescence in much of society.

According to sources, the origins of the current protests lie in the kingdom’s financial crisis which has meant, for example, that the government is unable to pay public sector wages. Politically, the unrest is a result of the oppression described above. It is not spontaneous but has been building-up over the years.
Where the current unrest will lead to is unclear. Popular demands in current protests range and have oscillated between the establishment of a constitutional monarchy at their most moderate and the stepping down of the king at their most radical.

As always, it is possible that for some the payment of wages would be considered adequate and enough response by the king; with that done such groups would be happy to have things continue as they have been before the uprising.
Possibilities for divisions exist within groups that want moderate change. The king’s hold on power is so all-encompassing and pervasive that he has at his disposal choice of many meaningless concessions that he can make and which some among moderates might consider enough basis to call-off the protests.

For those seeking more radical change the king’s abdication is unlikely and groups who seek change along those lines might differ in methods of achieving the goal and in the length of time they are prepared to hold-out for such reform. The longer this demand goes unfulfilled, the more likely divisions may appear in this group.

Advertisement

As a 19th century revolutionary put it many years ago, chances for change happening in societies such as Eswatini increase tremendously when some among the ruling group (i.e. beneficiaries of existing socio-economic system) themselves begin to question such a system.
That is to say, when such members of the ruling group realise that the nature and extent of reigning political oppression and economic exploitation need to change in order for their own privilege to continue. It is a difficult proposition with serious implications and one which cannot be avoided when its time has come.

We have to hope that the people of Eswatini achieve changes and a future which they want.
All must call for army and police brutality must stop.
Our condolences, thoughts and prayers go to the wives, husbands, children, friends and relatives of those killed in the protests.

Motlatsi Thabane

Advertisement
Advertisement

Insight

Down in the Dump: Conclusion

Published

on

I closed last week by recording the dreadful news that trashy Trump had been elected called to mind WB Yeats’s poem “The Second Coming.” This is the poem whose opening lines gave Chinua Achebe the phrase “things fall apart.”

Yeats observes “Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold / Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.”

It was written in 1919 and controversially uses Christian imagery relating to the Apocalypse and the Second Coming to reflect on the atmosphere in Europe following the slaughter of the First World War and the devastating flu epidemic that followed this.

It also reflects on the Irish War of Independence against British rule.

In lines that I can now read as if applying to the recent American election, Yeats mourns: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst / Are full of passionate intensity.”

And then I can visualise Trump in the poem’s closing lines: “What rough beast is this, its hour come round at last, / Slouching towards Bethlehem to be born?”

Trump is certainly a rough beast and isn’t the choice of verb, slouching, just perfect? For a non-allegorical account of the threat posed by the Dump, I can’t do better than to quote (as I often do) that fine South African political journalist, Will Shoki. In his words: “Trump’s administration simply won’t care about Palestinians, about the DRC, about the Sudanese.

It will be indifferent to the plight of the downtrodden and the oppressed, who will be portrayed as weak and pathetic. And it will give carte blanche [that is, free rein] to despotism and tyranny everywhere.

Not even social media, that once revered third-space we associated with subversion and revolution in the first quarter of the 21st century can save us because Silicon Valley is in Trump’s back pocket.”

So what follows the triumph of the Dump? We can’t just sit down and moan and bemoan. In a more recent piece of hers than the one I quoted last week, Rebecca Solnit has observed: “Authoritarians like Trump love fear, defeatism, surrender. Do not give them what they want . . . We must lay up supplies of love, care, trust, community and resolve — so we may resist the storm.”

Katt Lissard tells me that on November 7th following the confirmation of the election result, in the daytime and well into the evening in Manhattan, New York, there was a large demonstration in support of the immigrants Trump despises.

And a recent piece by Natasha Lennard gives us courage in its title “The Answer to Trump’s Victory is Radical Action.”

So, my Basotho readers, how about the peaceful bearing of some placards in front of the US Embassy in Maseru? Because the Dump doesn’t like you guys and gals one little bit.

One last morsel. I had intended to end this piece with the above call to action, but can’t resist quoting the following comment from the New York Times of November 13th on Trump’s plans to appoint his ministers.

I’m not sure a satirical gibe was intended (the clue is in the repeated use of the word “defence”), but it made me guffaw nonetheless. “Trump will nominate Pete Hegseth, a Fox News host with no government experience, as his defence secretary. Hegseth has often defended Trump on TV.” You see, it’s all about the Dump.

  • Chris Dunton is a former Professor of English and Dean of Humanities at the National University of Lesotho.

 

Continue Reading

Insight

A question of personal gain

Published

on

Recently, an audio recording featuring the distressed MP for Thaba-Bosiu Constituency, Joseph Malebaleba, circulated on social media. The MP appears to have spent a sleepless night, struggling with the situation in which he and his associates from the Revolution for Prosperity (RFP) party were denied a school feeding tender valued at M250 million per annum.

In 2022, Lesotho’s political landscape underwent a significant shift with the emergence of the RFP led by some of the country’s wealthiest individuals. Among them was Samuel Ntsokoane Matekane, arguably one of the richest people in Lesotho, who took the helm as the party’s leader and ultimately, the Prime Minister of Lesotho.

The RFP’s victory in the general election raised eyebrows, and their subsequent actions have sparked concerns about the motivations behind their involvement in politics.

In an interview with an American broadcasting network just after he won the elections, Matekane made a striking statement, proclaiming that he would run Lesotho exactly as he runs his business.

At first glance, many thought he was joking, but as time has shown, his words were far from an idle threat. In the business world, the primary goal is to maximize profits, and it appears that the RFP is adopting a similar approach to governance.

Behind the scenes, alarming developments have been unfolding. A communication from an RFP WhatsApp group revealed a disturbing request from the Minister of Communications, Nthati Moorosi, who asked if anyone in the group had a construction business and could inbox her.

This raises questions about the RFP’s focus on using government resources to benefit their own business interests.

The government has been embroiled in a series of scandals that have raised serious concerns about the ethical conduct of its officials. Recent reports have revealed shocking incidents of misuse of public funds and conflicts of interest among key government figures.

Over the past two years, the RFP has been accused of awarding government contracts to companies affiliated with their members, further solidifying concerns about their self-serving agenda. For instance, vehicles purchased for the police were allegedly sourced from suppliers connected to a Minister’s son and MP.

The MP for Peka, Mohopoli Monokoane, was found to have hijacked fertiliser intended to support impoverished farmers, diverting crucial resources away from those in need for personal gain.

Such actions not only betray the trust of the public but also have a direct impact on the livelihoods of vulnerable communities. Monokoane appeared before the courts of law this week.

While farmers voice their concerns regarding fertiliser shortages, it seems that Bishop Teboho Ramela of St. Paul African Apostolic Church, who is also a businessman, is allegedly involved in a corrupt deal concerning a M10 million fertilizer allocation, benefiting from connections with wealthy individuals in government.

The procurement of fertiliser appears to be mired in controversy; recall that the Minister of Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition, Thabo Mofosi, was also implicated in the M43 million tender.

The renovation of government buildings with elaborate lighting systems was contracted to a company owned by the son of an MP. The RFP’s enthusiasm for infrastructure development, specifically road construction and maintenance, is also tainted by self-interest, as they have companies capable of performing these tasks and supplying the necessary materials, such as asphalt.

Minister Moteane finds himself in a compromising situation regarding a lucrative M100 million airport tender that was awarded to his former company. Ministers have even gone so far as to award themselves ownership of diamond mines.

Meanwhile, the nation struggles with national identification and passport shortages, which according to my analysis the RFP seems hesitant to address until they can find a way to partner with an international company that will benefit their own interests.

The people of Lesotho are left wondering if their leaders are truly committed to serving the nation or simply lining their own pockets. As the RFP’s grip on power tightens, the consequences for Lesotho’s democracy and economy hang precariously in the balance.

It is imperative that citizens remain vigilant and demand transparency and accountability from their leaders, lest the nation slide further into an era of self-serving governance.

In conclusion, the RFP’s dominance has raised serious concerns about the motives behind their involvement in politics. The apparent prioritisation of personal profit over public welfare has sparked widespread disillusionment and mistrust among the population.

As Lesotho navigates this critical juncture, it is essential that its leaders are held accountable for their actions and that the nation’s best interests are placed above those of individuals.

Only through collective effort and a strong commitment to transparency and accountability can Lesotho ensure a brighter future for all its citizens.

Ramahooana Matlosa

Continue Reading

Insight

Down in the Dump: Part One

Published

on

Attentive readers will recall that some weeks ago, I scribbled a series of pieces on elections due to be held in the UK, France, South Africa, and the USA. These elections were unusually critical for the well-being of their countries and even that of the world.

The results of the last of these elections are now with us and we are faced with the devastating news that Donald Trump is heading back to the White House.

I can hardly think of worse news to swallow or to equip the world to survive the years ahead.

The Dump, as I call him, is one of the most odious, dangerous, untrustworthy individuals currently inhabiting planet Earth. To cite a few of his demerits: he is a convicted felon; he believes climate change is a hoax; he is a sexist and a racist (one of his former military advisers has gone so far as to describe him as a fascist).

He is a snuggle buddy of the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and will probably discontinue aid to Ukraine as it resists invasion by Russia. Western European allies such as France, Germany and the UK are dismayed at his victory, as he holds the principles of democracy and constitutionalism in contempt.

As for Africa, well, he once described it as a “shit country,” so don’t look forward to much support from him.

Readers who spent time at the NUL will remember my dear colleague Katt Lissard who is now back home in New York. She spent some years with us as a Professor specialising in Theatre studies and was the Artistic Director of our international Winter / Summer Institute for Theatre for Development.

Many activists in the USA like Katt, who don’t see themselves as part of the political mainstream, chose to campaign for the Democrats and Kamala Harris in the hope of keeping Trump and the far right out of power. Confronted with the news of Trump’s victory, she sent an email to friends noting this was “just a brief check-in from the incomprehensible USA.”

She then explained: “We’re in shock and the early days of processing, but white supremacy, misogyny and anti-immigrant bias are alive and well and driving the boat here.” So, how do Katt and millions of decent, like-minded Americans plan to weather the storm?

Katt explained: “We were deeply depressed and deeply furious as it became clear that one of the worst human beings on the planet was going back to the White House, but we are still breathing and know that we will in the days ahead begin to formulate plans and strategies—and not just for heading north across the Canadian border.”

Picking up on that last point, it may well be that many decent Americans might just up and off across the border; Canada had better prepare for an avalanche of applications for residence permits.

And not just from Americans; in, for example, the American university system alone there are many many Africans employed in high positions (Professors and such-like), who must now face the fact they are living in a country whose leader despises them and who may opt to get out.

In her email written to her friends, once the news from hell had been confirmed, Katt quoted a piece by Rebecca Solnit, one of the most exciting writers at work in the USA today (readers may remember that I have previously reviewed two of her books for this newspaper, Whose Story is This? and Recollections of My Non-Existence).

Now Solnit is a feminist and at the heart of her work is a dissection of the way women have been marginalised in the USA (let’s remember that Kamala Harris, the Presidential candidate who lost to Trump, did so partly because so many American males could not bring themselves to vote for a woman.

I am thinking of the kind of male who invaded the White House when it was announced Trump had lost the 2020 election, bare-chested and wearing cow-horn helmets on their numbskull heads).

Solnit has this to say on our response to the Trump victory: “They want you to feel powerless and to surrender and to let them trample everything and you are not going to let them.

You are not giving up and neither am I. The fact that we cannot save everything does not mean we cannot save anything and everything we can save is worth saving.

You may need to grieve or scream or take time off, but you have a role no matter what, and right now good friends and good principles are worth gathering in.

Remember what you love. Remember what loves you. Remember in this tide of hate what love is.” And then: “A lot of us are going to resist by building solidarity and sanctuary.”

What is so morale-boosting about Solnit’s piece is not just her vision but also her command of language.
Her writing is so crisp and elegant. Language comes at us at its best, of course, in literature, and when I heard that the Dump was on the move back to the White House, I immediately recalled one of the most startling poems in the English language, “The Second Coming” by the Irish poet WB Yeats.

I’ll kick off with that next week.

To be concluded

Chris Dunton

Continue Reading
Advertisement

ADVERTISEMENT

Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending