The Culmination Of Yahya Jammeh's Schemes - A Defeated Tyrant And A Nation United

Seeing the multitude of Gambians that thronged the streets; old and young, men and women, all visibly elated at the return of President Adama Barrow’s from Senegal is further testament to the relief the Gambians felt at seeing Yahya Jammeh’s back.  Just as it obtained during the campaign season leading up the elections of December 1^st 2016; Barrow out and about sees the largest convergence of Gambians for one cause. At first it was HOPE, now it is hope laced with CERTAINTY; certainty that they will finally live in peace and have the peace of mind that two decades of tyranny denied them. The welcoming crowd was arguably the largest ever recorded in recent Gambian political history. Onlookers and reporters alike were amazed at how much Adama Barrow means for The Gambia. The degree of love, hope, and expectations directed at him can only be matched by the love and support shown him by the average man, woman, and child. Watching from afar, one cannot help but be emotional and wish to have been there to be witness to history.

Adama Barrow; the unity candidate indeed has the support of a unified nation behind him. A nation, that up to his ascendance was divided and was growing further apart through the schemes of Yahya Jammeh.

Yahya’s politics has always been divisive on every front imaginable; political ideology, region, faith/religion, and most devastatingly; ethnic. Yahya drove a wedge between some hardliners in his Jola ethnic group especially and the rest of the Gambia, but more so between those blind tribal loyalists and the Mandinka that he openly branded as his enemies and enemies on to the other tribes as well. In fact his politics was everyone against the Mandinka ethnic group; a group that constitute over 40% of the Gambian population. Every opponent of substance that Yahya faced emerged from the Mandinka tribe, beyond that, Yahya dabbled in the oracle and strongly believes in ancient African religions. It is claimed that the oracle prophesized that his successor would be from the Mandinka tribe and understandably so since they are the largest constituency in the country and are active in politics and seeking political office.

The Gambian people never attached so much importance to their ethnic groupings or tribe that they’d shun others. The relationships have always been cordial and mutually respectful. In fact, between the tribes of the Gambia, there exist joking relations, akin to the Dozens where sentiments expressed are taken jokingly to promote social cohesion. Inter-marriage was prevalent and as a result, every single Gambian has some familial relationship to at least one other tribe. But to Yahya, there was too much political capital to let pass, and for a novice like him in politics, anything goes since force will not always work. He has effectively driven a wedge between sections of his native Jola and the Mandinka especially just for personal gains.

But the Gambian people are better than that and they rose above it overwhelmingly, even his kinsmen rejected his stance. Fear of reprisals kept some at his side and unfortunately, he convinced others among his kinsmen that it’s them against everyone else.

Every major security outfit has a Jola as its head or second in command. The army, the Republican Guards, National Intelligence Agency, the Prison Services, and a host of other government departments and parastatals are all headed by his kinsmen. Qualified and competent individuals are sidelined, especially if they are Mandinka. With such divisiveness being strengthened, especially in public where he, as a sitting president verbally attacks and threatens the Mandinka with extermination, the nation rose in unity and repelled such poisonous utterances and alien philosophy. What emerged was a true representation of Gambian diversity, a prove of Gambian brotherhood as attested to in the national anthem; … And Join Our Diverse People To Prove Man’s Brotherhood... Born to a Fula mother, a Mandinka father, with Sarahule ancestry and Wolof upbringing, Adama Barrow is the convergence of The Gambia in one man and he will deliver The Gambia from the oppressive and divisive rule of Yahya Jammeh.

When Adama Barrow emerged on the political scene by stepping into the leadership fold of the United Democratic Party (UDP) after Lawyer Ousainou Darboe and the rest of the executive were jailed, Yahya knew that he faces a challenge that he has never faced in his two decades of tyranny. So close to the election, so unexpected, and with so much angst about recent events; he was at a loss as to how to contain this new threat. Adama Barrow was hardly known outside of the executive circle of the UDP and he was a man Yahya never saw coming. With his emergence, ordinary citizens and politicians alike saw an opportunity to, in a way, return the favor to Lawyer Ousainou Darboe for his years of sacrifice and to declare Solo Sandeng, without any ambiguity; a martyr for The Gambian cause whose death would not be in vain. It would never be business as usual for Yahya and the APRC. And so it was that a revolution was born. Here is a movement that will send a tyrant scampering and frantically looking for life lines to no avail; a movement that in the end sent him into exile to live under another dictatorship in Equatorial Guinea.

Gambians reclaimed their country for good. The sub-region, the continent of Africa, and the world stand with the Gambians to see their mandate upheld. With Adama Barrow and the coalition, A NEW GAMBIA IS BORN.

A democratic Gambia;

A unified Gambia;

A Gambia of sovereign citizens;

A politically aware Gambia, and with its birth, the emergence on the political scene of a generation of young, energetic, determined, fearless, ambitious and informed youth who will not be silenced, EVER AGAIN.

FORWARD EVER, BACKWARD NEVER.

God speed, and may the Divine guide you and your team to a more prosperous and tolerant Gambia.

Welcome home Mr. President.

Is Pan-Africanism Dead?

Pan-Africanism, the notion that people of African descent share common interests and should therefore be unified. This of course was proposed at a time of great racial injustice both in Africa and against Africans in the diaspora. W.E.B. DuBois’s famous statement that “the problem of the 20^th century is the problem of the color line” was widely believed to be made with the clear knowledge that not only were people of color suffering in America, but even on the African continent under the yoke of colonialism.

To rid Africa of colonialism and fight for racial justice were largely viewed as inseparable. Marcus Garvey took it a step further by calling for the return of Africans back to Africa in his famous Africa for Africans slogan. Not only that, he believed that no person of color will ever have any dignity as long as Africa remained unliberated.

These ideas have picked up steam since then and eventually led to the political independence of African states in the mid-20^th century.

The idea of pan-Africanism started in the so called diaspora, of course in Africa there were individual struggles against colonialism to liberate specific territories. Names like Martin Delany, Alexander Crummel, and Edward Blyden are cited as early proponents of this idea.

W.E.B. DuBois though stands out more prominent and actually studied African history and culture, a concept he advocated amongst blacks. This gives the idea a more political and cultural outlook.

As the idea grew in popularity, so too were the supporters. The Honorable Marcus Garvey came on the scene with the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) in 1919 to 1924. His philosophy was for both economic as well as political liberation, although his Black Star liner wasn’t as successful as he hoped, coupled with his troubles in America, UNIA didn’t register much success, the idea of Pan-Africanism lived on and continued. Through the 1920s and 1940s C.L.R James and George Padmore were the most prominent proponents of the idea. By this time the idea was gaining a foothold on the continent.

Jomo Kenyatta, who was influenced by the teachings of George Padmore, in fact believed to be his disciple went on to lead Kenya to independence. There was Leopold Senghore, father of Senegal’s independence. This was by the late 1940s when the ideals were receding somewhat in America and picking up steam on the continent.

The most important figure on the continent for the movement was of course Kwame Nkurumah, who fervently believed that   colonialism could be totally defeated on the African continent. To prove it, he mounted a relentless campaign against the colonial institution in Africa and led his country; Ghana, to independence in 1957, the first sub-Saharan African nation to be independent.

Ten years later, all of Africa south of the Sahara will be independent with the exception of the Portuguese colonies and much of Southern Africa as well as the island nations. All in all, only nine out of the 48 nations of the mainland will remain under colonial rule, even then, by 1975, only Zimbabwe, South Africa and Djibouti remained to be independent.

Quite a feat knowing how entrenched the institution of colonialism was in Africa. This goes to show how a well-organized grassroots movement can create an impact, exactly what is needed at this time; a well-organized grassroots movement.

The various independence leaders of Africa can all be said to have Pan-Africanist views.

During his speech marking the independence of Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah said; “the independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is connected with the total liberation of the entire African continent.” To this he dedicated his efforts culminating in the formation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) on May 25^th 1963, (today celebrated as African Liberation day).

The OAU aimed to, amongst other things;

·         Intensify the fight against colonialism in the remaining territories of Africa, notably South Africa and Angola, two of the most brutal colonial outposts, and to end white minority rule.

·         To coordinate and intensify cooperation

·         The defense of the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Africa.

Nkrumah’s mantra was “independence today, tomorrow; THE UNITED STATES OF AFRICA, and he was not playing. For him it was much more than winning political independence, economic liberalization and cooperation was as crucial if not more so. Total independence with non-interference and non-alignment as well as the ability to defend African’s sovereignty were his goal. You can see why he had to go. Unfortunately, disagreements on how to go about such a union created division in the OAU which impeded success.

Looking at Africa today, we see why he made the matter so urgent, his prophetic words; “unite now or perish” stand as testament to the urgency of the matter.

So we ask, is that a fight worthy of fighting and if so, what challenges are to be expected?

We are witnessing the rise of the far right in Europe and its move from the fringes into the mainstream. With the immigrant crisis and global terrorism, it is only a matter of time before it dominates the mainstream, especially in Europe. What then in that scenario as they are heavily anti-immigrant (non-white) and often promoting white supremacist ideals? Who would’ve thought people will march in the streets of Europe, in broad daylight, with dressed in Nazi regalia and displaying Nazi symbols and slogans in 2016?

Meanwhile in Africa, we seem to have no direction and our issues are only footnotes in the global mainstream media.

The goals and approach may be different in this day and age, but without some form of unity, Africa's condition and the suffering of African women and children will never end.

Africa and the UN - To Stay or To Leave II

The issue of walking away from the U.N. is an isolationist move which will bear more ills than good. In the world we live in, we need more alliances than segregation. When a system is not working as expected it is better to work trying to change it from within. Every member of any team has some leverage he can use in any organization to sway things a certain way. Africa does have that leverage and can use it effectively and in the process make this important institution more viable for the many vulnerable citizens of the world.

Africa indeed has a genuine reason to be wary of the U.N. and Africa’s role in it. The devastating effects of war and the drive to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war” Made the U.N. a welcome idea among nations of the world, it cannot be made to lose that relevance. But on that promise, which is part of the U.N. charter, Africa has been failed miserably, so miserable that the Brahimi report was commissioned in 2000 to review U.N. peace keeping missions, a lot of which was in Africa in the 1990s. The report concluded that “the U.N has repeatedly failed to meet the challenge” outlined in its charter.

Africa witnessed devastating conflicts in the 1990s that resulted in the deaths of over a million people partly due to the failures of U.N peacekeeping missions; the notables being Rwanda and Somalia. The mission in Liberia, which started in 2003, is often cited as a success. In fact, the intervention of the Nigerian led ECOWAS force supported by the U.S., as well as President Obasanjo’s team of African diplomats that resulted in Charles Taylor’s relinquishing of power deserve more credit. Africans resolved that conflict through their own efforts. The U.N. facilitated the peaceful transition to elections.

Between 1992 and 1994, there were over 30,000 U.N. peacekeepers deployed in Somalia; the period during which 800,000 Somalis were massacred. This was such a huge failure that President Clinton announced U.S. troop withdrawals followed by a highly restrictive policy of deploying U.S. troops on future U.N. peacekeeping mission. This after 18 U.S. soldiers were  killed, dismembered and dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, 75 injured as well as 25 Pakistani  soldiers killed and another 54 injured. The U.N.’s own Commission of Inquiry set up to investigate that specific peacekeeping mission recommended “the U.N. should refrain from undertaking further peace enforcement actions within the internal conflicts of states.” (Jacobson, 2012). But a body as relevant as the U.N. shouldn't be reduced to just monitoring ceasefires and elections

In spite of such a recommendation, then came the case of the genocide in Rwanda. Prior to the swiftest and most systematic genocide, there was the Arusha Accords signed between the Rwandan government and the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) that saw an end to a three year civil war and brought much needed stability. Many factors could be cited as to having led to the breakdown of the peace accord and the beginning of the infamous Rwandan genocide. Some of the points raised by international diplomacy and public policy experts included the failure of the U.N. body to give Rwanda a permanent membership on the Security Council amongst other issues. In the 104 days of violence start started after the peace accord broke down, almost 1 million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were massacred.  After the massacre started, the U.N. peacekeepers disgracefully abandoned the thousands of civilians who sought refuge in the places the U.N peacekeepers were stationed knowing full well that the militia will kill these vulnerable civilians, which they did. They chose to focus on evacuating their own expatriates, government officials and foreign nationals leaving the Rwandans to fend for themselves.

Two weeks after the massacres started, which the U.N. failed to recognize as genocide, it went ahead to reduce its peacekeeping troops by almost 90 per cent.  This move was, made contrary to the recommendations of Nigeria, the African representative on the Security Council at the time that civilians were in grave danger and that U.N. peacekeepers should be mandated to protect them.

A U.N. commissioned report in December 1999 assessing the organization’s involvement in Rwanda stated that “member states failed Rwanda in deplorable ways; ignoring evidence that genocide was planned, refusing to act once it was underway and finally abandoning the Rwandan people when they most needed protection.”

However one chooses to look at it, it was a lack of will, more than anything else that prevented the U.N. from acting in saving many Rwandan lives. An assessment by the U.N’s own human rights investigator for Rwanda in August 1993 cited the possibility that genocide might occur. That following January, Canadian Lt. Gen.  Dallaire sent a cable warning of the risk of genocide which was received by Kofi Annan but never shared with the Security Council as should be the norm. These two assessments should have been enough to compel the U.N. to act and prevent the genocide from reaching the scale it did in 1994.

There is the current case of U.N peacekeepers sexually abusing women and children in their assigned countries like Congo and Sudan adding to risks of increased HIV/AIDS cases.

Despite some success, the failures of the U.N. are many and cannot be ignored. So Mugabe can be forgiven for taking the stance he took on the U.N. and her role in Africa, but most importantly on the failures of the body to give the African voices the attention they deserve. It is a tragedy that in a body as important as the U.N. non-African voices prevails over African voices on matters regarding Africa.

If you are tempted to argue that African leaders need to get their collective acts together in order to be heard or respected, the fact that their various countries are accepted as members of the U.N. counters that position. If they are not good enough to be listened to, then they shouldn’t be accepted in the organization. Which ties back with Mugabe’s point that reforms are needed at the U.N to reflect Africa’s representation as viable.

But in typical fashion, since Mugabe has been labelled a tyrant and undemocratic, that suffices for him not to be heard and his message, regardless of its relevance can be ignored. A typical case of shooting the messenger

Bob Marley’s famous line that “How long shall they kill our prophets, while we stand aside and look…” can be relevant in the case of dealing with Mugabe.

Despite what is being portrayed in the media, Mugabe command respect among his peers, but most importantly, a vast majority of ordinary Africans and people of African descent view him as a hero, a defiant hero who has Africa’s interest at heart. A view not shared by Africa’s so called intellectual class. In many cases, with the exception of a few, most of their assessment of African affairs are viewed as extensions of imperialist views.

An African Union

A child in need, hurt and aching; calls out to her mother, longing for her touch, her comfort and her assurance. It is said that even dying men call out for their mothers. Africa, home of the black man, is that mother to people of African descent. They have suffered all forms of injustice, indignity, and suffering. Even in lands that have been set up as their home away from Africa, they find no peace. Black people are looked at with contempt, disrespect, and belittled in every way imaginable.

In April and May 1964, Malcolm X sought the help of independent African nations to help the course of the black civil rights movement. This visit led to his formation of the Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU) with such goals like restoring the connections with Africa, educating diaspora Africans about Africa as well as setting up economic ties with Africa, all in the hope of reorienting blacks to a positive image of Africa. Africa, through the newly formed Organization of African Unity (OAU) wasn't very effective in furthering the course of the civil rights movement, neither was it in a position to put any pressure on the US to recognize black as citizens of the US with rights like any other citizen of the US. Besides, apartheid was at its worse right under its nose too but collectively, the continent couldn't save her own citizens on the continent. One may say this is due to the infancy independence and the lack of structures to effectively lobby for any course.

Fast forward to 2015, Guyana's new government is asking for support from the African Union amongst other international players to help diplomatically resolve the border dispute with its larger neighbor Venezuela. This help too will not be forthcoming unfortunately due to the ineffectiveness of this continental body. A sad situation however one looks at it.

Black people as a race, have collectively been fighting for their dignity longer than any group of people, they have suffered the most, collectively as a people. They are the most oppressed. No reprieve, no hope for better days, they feel so down and beat almost to the point of defeat; then they look up to Africa for help, and what do they see? Their hopes are dashed, dreams crushed, salvation unlikely, because the mother herself is in bondage, suffering, crying and bleeding more than they are, yet we can’t seem to do much to help. Even the oppressors cite conditions in Africa to justify their oppression of blacks, because our leaders are worse. Then, unwillingly, we accept our status and the labels put on us. We’ve lost the physical fight, we’ve lost the mental fight, and the spiritual strength is waning fast. 

But if history taught us one thing, it is that you cannot break the spirit and will of the true black man to true self-determination and dignity. And fortunately, there is still a lot of those true spirits left and they are not resting, they are fighting on.

The Israeli prime minister recently called for Jews 'persecuted' in Europe to come back to Israel and will be received with open arms, even though it may be back to some stolen land, they have a place to go with hopes of a better life. What African leader could say the same to oppressed blacks elsewhere who choose to look up to Africa for salvation? They cannot even stand up to face leaders of countries openly dehumanizing black people and tell it to their face because collectively their words amount to nothing even at the assembly of nations. 

Listen to the voices of some of your oppressed brothers and sisters and for once see things from their position. When the Emperor Haile Selassie gave Sashamane Land to the blacks from Jamaica who wanted to resettle in Africa, he did it with a higher goal in mind, the unification of blacks across the world.

Black unity should be understood in the context of brotherhood amongst people with so much in common and not as a plot to dominance over any group. It is a fight for dignity and independence in the true sense of the word and not a power struggle. Africa can be independent of the rest of the world in every sense of the word, so Africans need not dominate or colonize others for any reason.

Nkrumah said it decades ago that if we do not unite, we will perish, the situation in Africa today is proof of that.

But just like we emerged from colonialism, so too will we emerge from neo-colonialism. The dawn of Africa’s true independence and subsequent unification is upon us and we should embrace it.

“Unite for the benefit of your people for its later than you think...Cause Jah children wanna come home” (Bob Marley)