UKWELIYAKINIFU
Member
- Oct 6, 2020
- 27
- 50
The incumbent President of the United Republic of Tanzania, H. E. Dr. John Joseph Pombe Magufuli, has on a number of occasions expressed his scepticism on imperialism and concern over it’s camouflaged multifaceted manifestations in the country. For many people ‘imperialism’ (in Swahili, ‘ubeberu’) is an archaic draconian concept relegated to archives.
Most also shy away from publicly calling imperialism out under the guise of political or public relations correctness. Some are wary that the concept conjures up skeletons of a dark history and unmasks present-day thinly veiled exploitation thus talking about it is likely to anger the powers that be and harminternational relations, attract an invisible black listing by multilateral and bilateral organizations and rock the boat of international aid and foreign direct investments.
In this sense, imperialism is a concept shrouded in controversy and therefore for a sitting president of a developing state to variously and unapologetically publicly call imperialism out deserves some attention.
The first question we need to ask ourselves as Tanzanians is whether imperialism is over, something of the past or it has evolved and very much with us in present-day. This is a no-brainer. Anyone with a basic comprehension of the political economy of imperialism will undoubtedly understand that it has a protracted history, that it has evolved over many centuries constantly changing its names and practices, but always extending its tentacles and retaining its cardinal nature, namely economic exploitation and profit maximisation. Imperialism has never stopped, and it will never be over, ever.
There is profuse social, cultural, ideological, economic and political evidence that were currently leaving in what in his renown treatise, the late Kwame Nkrurmah, called the last stage of imperialism, Neo-Colonialism. This is history manifesting itself in present-day.
The second question is whether the concept ‘imperialism’ has any relevance in modern-day politics. To answer this question, it is important to understand that the fundamental political question for Tanzania concerns national development and people centered development. What does development mean to us? What does it take to develop and at what pace? What are the entrapments of our national development? Do we have effective strategies to maneuver and steer our nation through the labyrinth of poverty?
A simple answer will be that we have our 2000–2025 Tanzania Development Vision which answers these questions. However, development is not a simple question and does not require a simple answer. It is not about what the government in its annual budget for, but rather about how as nation we can marshal the massive resources required to invest in our development.
The election manifestos of the two competitively-leading parties have the following answers regarding the massive resources required for investment in national development and people centered development:
The CHADEMA Election Manifesto (2020: 56) states that “…Kilimo ndiyo msingi mkuu wa maendeleo ya uchumi wa Tanzania.” Literally speaking CHADEMA’s stance is that the bedrock of our nation’s economic development is agriculture.
On the other hand, the CCM Manifesto (2020:1), states that “…CCM inatambua kuwa nchi yetu ina watu wenye uwezo na rasilimali za kutosha kama vile ardhi, madini, gesi asilia, misitu, wanyama, malikale / mambo ya kale, bahari, maziwa na mito, pamoja na nafasi na fursa nzuri za kijiografia. Rasilimali na fursa hizi zikitumiwa vizuri zitakuwa chachu kubwa kwa maendeleo ya Taifa…” CCM’s manifesto recognises the importance of proper national control of all her resources for meaningful development.
In that respect there is a stark difference between these two parties in the thinking regarding the use of the resources for our development. This is where President Magufuli’s scepticism on imperialism becomes relevant, because of imperialism cardinal nature of economic exploitation and profit maximisation particularly through foreign control of the economy and valuable national resources. We are all aware of the 5th phase government actions, track record and stance on national resources and the controversies it has attracted.
At this point, the question of patriotism and its role in contemporary Tanzanian politics, and in the protection and promotion of our collective national interests becomes relevant. Specifically, the CHADEMA presidential candidate, Hon. Tundu Antiphas Lissu comes to mind. Hon. Lissu is variously on record fighting for local control of natural resources in particle minerals and wildlife. He has adamantly condemned the Mining Act’s favor of foreign investors, lambasted mining investors disregard of local rules and castigated modern day plunder which continue unabated. Some of his most interesting works in the subject include:
‘Conducive environment’ for development?; Globalization, national economy and the politics of plunder in Tanzania’s mining industry’ he authored in 2004.
In Gold We Trust: The Political Economy of Law, Human Rights and the Environment in Tanzania’s Mining Industry,’ he authored in 2001;
“A Golden Opportunity? How Tanzania is failing to Benefit from Gold Mining” he co-authored with Mark Cutis in 2008.
Lissu’s track record as an activist attest to his patriotic inclination and clear anti-imperialism stance. However, as a prominent opposition political figure his patriotic stance has become questionable particularly his indisputable alignment to forces of imperialism including western international media and western international community.
Contrary to his stance as an activist, Lissu was uncharacteristically quiet to lend his support to government’s legal wrangle with mining firms on revenue sharing, or applaud legislations which have resulted in sweeping changes in the exploitation of natural resources in the country’s mining sector.
On 5th January 2018 while in Nairobi Lissu labeled Tanzania “a skunk of the world” and on 8th June 2020 prophesied that Tanzania will become a pariah state because of President Magufuli’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic.
(See at 2020 Presidential Election: Tanzania, a nation at the crossroads). His sentiments echoed those of another prominent oppositional leader, Zitto Kabwe, who also went to international media and painted an extremely grave picture of the President’s handling of the crisis and predicted that Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda will emerge faster than Tanzania in both the pandemic and its economic aftermath (see at Tanzania risks pariah status in Covid-19 response - African Business Magazine).
Today both of these leaders are all over the country campaigning free from COVID-19 fears, while the international community they so trusted and urged the President to follow suit in approach are still deeply entrenched in fighting the pandemic. Like most of the international community, none of leaders have had the guts to acknowledge in public the President’s leadership and insightful handling of the pandemic which remains a mystery and global wonder. Can any one imagine if it was a western nation or western head of state that has managed to do what Tanzania has managed in the context of COVID-19 what would be extent of the media coverage?
While in Belgium on 4th November 2018, Lissu expressed his concern over deteriorating relations between Tanzania and the EU. (see at Lissu wants Tanzania to come clean on deteriorating relationship with EU - Sauti Kubwa). Stating that deterioration in diplomatic relations between the EU and Tanzania would be very costly to the welfare of the people of Tanzaniaand that Tanzanians, should not allow the country to be turned into an international pariah, ‘a skunk of the world’, in Lissu’s word. For these diplomatic relations are crucial regardless of what the legitimate elected government consider to be of national interest. Lissu was not privy to the government’s concern or displeasure.
Again, on 22nd January 2020, Zitto Kabwe wrote and asked the World Bank to withhold a loan to the government. As if the loan was for certain individuals personal benefits, Hon. Kabwe stated in his letter to WB Board of Directors that the government didn’t deserve getting the planned loan which was designated to improve girls’ access to secondary education.
Both of these prominent leaders, Tundu Lissu and Zitto Kabwe have directly and indirectly called on the internal community to interfere on our sovereign state and asked the international community to treat Tanzania as an outcast, a pariah state. Regardless of the misgivings they have, one but wonders, whether they actually trust the international community to have better interest for Tanzania and Tanzanians than the President of Tanzania.
Whatever misgivings they may have, it is astounding that a responsible, patriotic person would call for the international community to institute measures which will mostly affect the common people than Government leaders they want to oust in power.
President Magufuli has demonstrated that he is ready to call out imperialism and protect Tanzania from exploitation. Indeed, Tanzania is a signatory to the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. However, if international law will not protect our rights that will not be unprecedented.
On the time scale of its entire history and in all its forms, international law has always played the role of facilitating rather than inhibiting imperialism. Let me take you on a brief historical ride to juggle your memories on the role of law in legitimising and perpetuating global imperialism.
You may recall that in its era, slavery was legal by international law long codified by the Roman Law. Then laws criminalised slaves who attempted to free themselves from bondage. By copious lawful decrees it was a criminal act for slaves individually or collectively to attempt to free themselves. Even in the twilight of slavery, international law proved the greatest obstacle on the path of abolition of the international slave trade.
Again, you may recall that it was international law which provided for the right of conquest i.e. a former historically legitimate right of ownership to land after immediate possession via force of arms. So if someone was militarily mightier international law gave them the right to subjugate and exploit at will. When it was no longer profitable, the laws changed and made territorial acquisition through armed forces illegal even when used to rectify prior injustices.[1]Yet hasn’t Russia in recent times annexed Crimea without consequence.
You may also recall that colonialism was legal. Our learned brothers and sisters are most likely aware of the international law known as the Doctrine of Discovery under which majority of non-European countries including ours were colonised. The famous Berlin conference which sliced Africa into pieces and distributed them amongst some European countries was protected by international law. Under the Doctrine of Discovery, European countries claimed superior rights over Indigenous nations, and their explorers planted flags and crosses in the lands of native peoples, effectively making legal claims of ownership and domination over the lands, assets, and peoples they had “discovered.”
As recent as 1960s blacks were fighting for civil rights in the United States despite the emancipation proclamation decreed on January 1, 1863, which freed all persons in North America’s territories from slavery. As recent as February 11, 1990 when the late former South African President Nelson Mandela was released from prison, institutionalised racial segregation perpetuated through the apartheid policy was legal in South Africa, and the South African minority white rule had support in some of the most prominent western countries. It is on record that the West regarded the apartheid administration as a significant friend in the Cold War. It is also on record that because of economic interests, nationssuch as Britain and America had a moderate stance on the South Africa’s apartheid regime and voted against financial sanctions against her at UN conferences.
For some of you whose elementary history has eluded your memory, the common definition of imperialism is a policy or ideology of extending the rule or authority of a country over other countries and people, often by military force or by gaining political and economic control. Imperialism and neo-colonialism are not historical artefacts, very much alive in the contemporary society.
Part of its imperialists’ strategy is to our dampen our nation’s optimism over self-reliance belittle our development and capacity for national self-determination. We need a president who recognise how imperialism perpetuates itself and is ready to make a stance against exploitation. President John Pombe Magufuli has done that convincingly, and that is to his credit.
[1]Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance With the Charter of the United Nations, G.A. Res. 2625 (1970) (“No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognisedas legal.”)
Most also shy away from publicly calling imperialism out under the guise of political or public relations correctness. Some are wary that the concept conjures up skeletons of a dark history and unmasks present-day thinly veiled exploitation thus talking about it is likely to anger the powers that be and harminternational relations, attract an invisible black listing by multilateral and bilateral organizations and rock the boat of international aid and foreign direct investments.
In this sense, imperialism is a concept shrouded in controversy and therefore for a sitting president of a developing state to variously and unapologetically publicly call imperialism out deserves some attention.
The first question we need to ask ourselves as Tanzanians is whether imperialism is over, something of the past or it has evolved and very much with us in present-day. This is a no-brainer. Anyone with a basic comprehension of the political economy of imperialism will undoubtedly understand that it has a protracted history, that it has evolved over many centuries constantly changing its names and practices, but always extending its tentacles and retaining its cardinal nature, namely economic exploitation and profit maximisation. Imperialism has never stopped, and it will never be over, ever.
There is profuse social, cultural, ideological, economic and political evidence that were currently leaving in what in his renown treatise, the late Kwame Nkrurmah, called the last stage of imperialism, Neo-Colonialism. This is history manifesting itself in present-day.
The second question is whether the concept ‘imperialism’ has any relevance in modern-day politics. To answer this question, it is important to understand that the fundamental political question for Tanzania concerns national development and people centered development. What does development mean to us? What does it take to develop and at what pace? What are the entrapments of our national development? Do we have effective strategies to maneuver and steer our nation through the labyrinth of poverty?
A simple answer will be that we have our 2000–2025 Tanzania Development Vision which answers these questions. However, development is not a simple question and does not require a simple answer. It is not about what the government in its annual budget for, but rather about how as nation we can marshal the massive resources required to invest in our development.
The election manifestos of the two competitively-leading parties have the following answers regarding the massive resources required for investment in national development and people centered development:
The CHADEMA Election Manifesto (2020: 56) states that “…Kilimo ndiyo msingi mkuu wa maendeleo ya uchumi wa Tanzania.” Literally speaking CHADEMA’s stance is that the bedrock of our nation’s economic development is agriculture.
On the other hand, the CCM Manifesto (2020:1), states that “…CCM inatambua kuwa nchi yetu ina watu wenye uwezo na rasilimali za kutosha kama vile ardhi, madini, gesi asilia, misitu, wanyama, malikale / mambo ya kale, bahari, maziwa na mito, pamoja na nafasi na fursa nzuri za kijiografia. Rasilimali na fursa hizi zikitumiwa vizuri zitakuwa chachu kubwa kwa maendeleo ya Taifa…” CCM’s manifesto recognises the importance of proper national control of all her resources for meaningful development.
In that respect there is a stark difference between these two parties in the thinking regarding the use of the resources for our development. This is where President Magufuli’s scepticism on imperialism becomes relevant, because of imperialism cardinal nature of economic exploitation and profit maximisation particularly through foreign control of the economy and valuable national resources. We are all aware of the 5th phase government actions, track record and stance on national resources and the controversies it has attracted.
At this point, the question of patriotism and its role in contemporary Tanzanian politics, and in the protection and promotion of our collective national interests becomes relevant. Specifically, the CHADEMA presidential candidate, Hon. Tundu Antiphas Lissu comes to mind. Hon. Lissu is variously on record fighting for local control of natural resources in particle minerals and wildlife. He has adamantly condemned the Mining Act’s favor of foreign investors, lambasted mining investors disregard of local rules and castigated modern day plunder which continue unabated. Some of his most interesting works in the subject include:
‘Conducive environment’ for development?; Globalization, national economy and the politics of plunder in Tanzania’s mining industry’ he authored in 2004.
In Gold We Trust: The Political Economy of Law, Human Rights and the Environment in Tanzania’s Mining Industry,’ he authored in 2001;
“A Golden Opportunity? How Tanzania is failing to Benefit from Gold Mining” he co-authored with Mark Cutis in 2008.
Lissu’s track record as an activist attest to his patriotic inclination and clear anti-imperialism stance. However, as a prominent opposition political figure his patriotic stance has become questionable particularly his indisputable alignment to forces of imperialism including western international media and western international community.
Contrary to his stance as an activist, Lissu was uncharacteristically quiet to lend his support to government’s legal wrangle with mining firms on revenue sharing, or applaud legislations which have resulted in sweeping changes in the exploitation of natural resources in the country’s mining sector.
On 5th January 2018 while in Nairobi Lissu labeled Tanzania “a skunk of the world” and on 8th June 2020 prophesied that Tanzania will become a pariah state because of President Magufuli’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic.
(See at 2020 Presidential Election: Tanzania, a nation at the crossroads). His sentiments echoed those of another prominent oppositional leader, Zitto Kabwe, who also went to international media and painted an extremely grave picture of the President’s handling of the crisis and predicted that Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda will emerge faster than Tanzania in both the pandemic and its economic aftermath (see at Tanzania risks pariah status in Covid-19 response - African Business Magazine).
Today both of these leaders are all over the country campaigning free from COVID-19 fears, while the international community they so trusted and urged the President to follow suit in approach are still deeply entrenched in fighting the pandemic. Like most of the international community, none of leaders have had the guts to acknowledge in public the President’s leadership and insightful handling of the pandemic which remains a mystery and global wonder. Can any one imagine if it was a western nation or western head of state that has managed to do what Tanzania has managed in the context of COVID-19 what would be extent of the media coverage?
While in Belgium on 4th November 2018, Lissu expressed his concern over deteriorating relations between Tanzania and the EU. (see at Lissu wants Tanzania to come clean on deteriorating relationship with EU - Sauti Kubwa). Stating that deterioration in diplomatic relations between the EU and Tanzania would be very costly to the welfare of the people of Tanzaniaand that Tanzanians, should not allow the country to be turned into an international pariah, ‘a skunk of the world’, in Lissu’s word. For these diplomatic relations are crucial regardless of what the legitimate elected government consider to be of national interest. Lissu was not privy to the government’s concern or displeasure.
Again, on 22nd January 2020, Zitto Kabwe wrote and asked the World Bank to withhold a loan to the government. As if the loan was for certain individuals personal benefits, Hon. Kabwe stated in his letter to WB Board of Directors that the government didn’t deserve getting the planned loan which was designated to improve girls’ access to secondary education.
Both of these prominent leaders, Tundu Lissu and Zitto Kabwe have directly and indirectly called on the internal community to interfere on our sovereign state and asked the international community to treat Tanzania as an outcast, a pariah state. Regardless of the misgivings they have, one but wonders, whether they actually trust the international community to have better interest for Tanzania and Tanzanians than the President of Tanzania.
Whatever misgivings they may have, it is astounding that a responsible, patriotic person would call for the international community to institute measures which will mostly affect the common people than Government leaders they want to oust in power.
President Magufuli has demonstrated that he is ready to call out imperialism and protect Tanzania from exploitation. Indeed, Tanzania is a signatory to the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. However, if international law will not protect our rights that will not be unprecedented.
On the time scale of its entire history and in all its forms, international law has always played the role of facilitating rather than inhibiting imperialism. Let me take you on a brief historical ride to juggle your memories on the role of law in legitimising and perpetuating global imperialism.
You may recall that in its era, slavery was legal by international law long codified by the Roman Law. Then laws criminalised slaves who attempted to free themselves from bondage. By copious lawful decrees it was a criminal act for slaves individually or collectively to attempt to free themselves. Even in the twilight of slavery, international law proved the greatest obstacle on the path of abolition of the international slave trade.
Again, you may recall that it was international law which provided for the right of conquest i.e. a former historically legitimate right of ownership to land after immediate possession via force of arms. So if someone was militarily mightier international law gave them the right to subjugate and exploit at will. When it was no longer profitable, the laws changed and made territorial acquisition through armed forces illegal even when used to rectify prior injustices.[1]Yet hasn’t Russia in recent times annexed Crimea without consequence.
You may also recall that colonialism was legal. Our learned brothers and sisters are most likely aware of the international law known as the Doctrine of Discovery under which majority of non-European countries including ours were colonised. The famous Berlin conference which sliced Africa into pieces and distributed them amongst some European countries was protected by international law. Under the Doctrine of Discovery, European countries claimed superior rights over Indigenous nations, and their explorers planted flags and crosses in the lands of native peoples, effectively making legal claims of ownership and domination over the lands, assets, and peoples they had “discovered.”
As recent as 1960s blacks were fighting for civil rights in the United States despite the emancipation proclamation decreed on January 1, 1863, which freed all persons in North America’s territories from slavery. As recent as February 11, 1990 when the late former South African President Nelson Mandela was released from prison, institutionalised racial segregation perpetuated through the apartheid policy was legal in South Africa, and the South African minority white rule had support in some of the most prominent western countries. It is on record that the West regarded the apartheid administration as a significant friend in the Cold War. It is also on record that because of economic interests, nationssuch as Britain and America had a moderate stance on the South Africa’s apartheid regime and voted against financial sanctions against her at UN conferences.
For some of you whose elementary history has eluded your memory, the common definition of imperialism is a policy or ideology of extending the rule or authority of a country over other countries and people, often by military force or by gaining political and economic control. Imperialism and neo-colonialism are not historical artefacts, very much alive in the contemporary society.
Part of its imperialists’ strategy is to our dampen our nation’s optimism over self-reliance belittle our development and capacity for national self-determination. We need a president who recognise how imperialism perpetuates itself and is ready to make a stance against exploitation. President John Pombe Magufuli has done that convincingly, and that is to his credit.
[1]Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance With the Charter of the United Nations, G.A. Res. 2625 (1970) (“No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognisedas legal.”)
