AKUFO ADDO URGED-Abrogate Power Purchase Agreement With some IPPs

President Nana Akufo Addo

By Lawrence Segbefia

The African Center for Energy Policy (ACEP) has urged government to review existing Power Purchase Agreement with companies holding Power Purchase contracts with the Electricity Company of Ghana. According ACEP, it is imperative for government to pull out of some of the agreements since most of the companies have not yet secured funds for the projects even though they have expressed interest.

“All emergency power contracts that have failed to deliver on time will have to be canceled or renegotiated into a regular IPP to save on cost.

The high tariffs associated with the emergency plants are not appropriate for long term economic planning and protection of industries,” it said.

“The conversion of the Early Power Project from an emergency to a regular IPP project is a clear example of how government can reduce high cost of procurement of new capacity,” it added.

The statement was contained in a report titled “Beyond the Election 2016”.

Even though the statement was released before the elections, ACEP was of the firm stance that any government that governs in 2017 must cancel such contracts.

Already, the outgoing Mahama government had announced that it has halt new licenses to companies that have expressed interest to set up Independent Power Plants.

Citi Business News checks are yet to confirm if the directive is being adhered to.

Meanwhile checks from the website of the Energy Commission revealed that the last license for an IPP to operate was granted on 16th August 2016.

Editorial

A HOUSE AND PROPAGANDA

We have always mentioned that it is highly improper to allocate houses to former Presidents who can afford their accommodation whiles the state ignores the housing needs of the poor and disadvantaged.

This was our principled stand when former President Kufuor was exiting office and it cannot change today.

However, the noise about former President Mahama’s choice of residence is not a matter of principle. It is about doing him in.

First, the residence in question is not the official and permanent home of Vice President.

Indeed the official residence of the Vice President is still under construction at Cantonment in Accra and is expected to be ready in a few months.

Secondly, President Mahama has not refused to vacate his official residence.

He only showed a preference for the bungalow he has lived in for close to seven years.

Our advice to President Mahama is that he should hand over the bungalow to end the needless bashing he is receiving from his opponents.

In the final analysis, our position is that no President should be given a house.

DODGING “LAND MINES” ON THE BEACH OF CHORKOR

By Joojo Cobbinah

In the sweltering afternoon on the beach of Chorkor, a slum along the Atlantic Coast of Ghana, two playful boys were competing in a race; breathing uncontrollably. The front runner, with short legs that could carry him faster, paced up and he landed on a soft black polythene bag. Something yellowish oozed out and splattered his legs. He dashed some few metres screaming “feee” in the Ga language meaning faecal matter!

I observed him run into the sea to wash the probably hot substance off his legs. His friend, who was metres behind, overtook him, laughing uncontrollably but within seconds he also rushed into the sea to wash his legs. He too, had stepped on a “landmine”. The two boys would probably not wash their hands with soap before eating and may be infected with cholera or form part of the over 2,100 children who die yearly because of preventable diarrhea according to Water Aid Ghana.

This is how I welcome you to the Chorkor beach where you have no choice but to tread cautiously else you land in fecal matter. Chorkor is densely populated and on the verge of exploding yet many houses do not have toilets forcing residents to use public toilets. It is dehumanizing to see people stand in long queues squeezing their bums and calling out loudly to people in toilets to “hurry up” so they can take turns to ease themselves.
Unfortunately, many residents of Chorkor who are not patient to wait their turn run to the beach to defecate openly contributing to the 1 million people in urban Ghana who practice open defecation according to UNICEF and WHO joint research.

FILTH AND FISH

Instead of the people relaxing on the beach, heaps of filth adorn what should have been a beautiful coastline, forming a wall while thick sludge ooze from it.  Adults set very bad examples for children as they hunker down easing themselves without any shame. Children also join in, and afterwards play in the same sand where they defecated. On hot days, many children gleefully swim in the ocean which is also polluted with unmentionable properties.

The end result is sanitation disease outbreaks. Chorkor has always contributed to Ghana’s shameful cholera mortality and grim statistics. Ghana’s College of Physicians and Surgeons faculty of public health reports that Accra recorded about 20,500 cases of cholera between June 2014 and February 2015 out of which 121 persons died. Yet the people of Chorkor show no sign of change.

I observed many people dumped solid and liquid waste on the beach and I got a surprising response when I inquired why they do that- “Do you sleep here? Do you live here? Why do you want to tell us what to do”? These were some responses I received from the people.  Aside lack of refuse containers on the beach, poor sanitation practices in Chorkor is as a result of the almost incorrigible habits of the residents.

Nii Koi Lartey, a fisherman told me, the people of Chorkor stopped defecating and dumping of refuse on the beach when city guards patrolled the beach. Obviously, they could not stay there forever, so the people revived their bad practices.

“Now we are feeling the full effect of dumping rubbish into the ocean. Anytime we cast our net we don’t catch fish rather we catch filth. Our big canoes fill up with filth. We have been warning people to stop the act but they failed to listen,” he lamented.

Nii Koi added that sometimes they drag nets over feces spread all over shore. Clearly, fish caught in such an environment are not healthy for consumption. Such complains should be enough to deter residents from easing themselves on the beach yet the practice continues.

The fishing business has therefore taken a nose dive. Fishermen who are serious about having a big catch spend more money to buy fuel in order to navigate deep waters.  Nii Koi is worried poor sanitary conditions would eventually kill their dwindling fishing industry. That would mean no jobs which will contribute to Chorkor’s already high unemployment rate.

Low catch has therefore compelled Fish mongers to rely on imported frozen fish to survive. Women no longer rely on fishermen for fish rather they turn their attention to cold stores.

It is apparent that poor sanitation at the beach does not only affect the health of the people but gradually it is stealing their livelihood.

A 2015 joint UNICEF and WHO research suggests that Ghana is the worst country for urban sanitation in West Africa and number 4 in Africa where 80%  of people in urban areas live without toilets in their homes. The Government of Ghana urgently needs to have a second look at the country’s worsening sanitation crisis and find a permanent solution. The Accra Metropolitan Assembly has many sanitation bylaws and even sanitation courts to punish offenders but it is evident none is working. In 2013, government instituted National Sanitation day once a month for citizens to clean up yet the problem failed to go away. Bad attitudes die hard and if government is serious about sanitation then it should implement the laws by clamping down on landlords who fail to provide toilets for tenants. The government should also strategically provide litter bins in villages, towns and cities across the country.

AFRICAN LANGUAGES MUST BE RESTORED TO THEIR PRE-COLONIAL GLORY

By Motsoko Pheko

Our ancestors were agriculturists and pastoral farmers. If they had followed the European calendar system whose year begins in January, they would not have survived and we might not be here today. But they were very wise. They knew how nature works. They knew what time rain comes.

They knew what time some parts of this country experience frost which destroys harvest that is not ready at the right time. Their year calendar began in August (Phato) not in January (Pherekhong). This year had four seasons, namely Selemo –Spring, Hlabula – Summer – Hoetla – Autumn, and Winter – Mariha.

Our ancestors dug gold, copper and other minerals. They were iron experts long before Europe. They had never gone to school to study geology, but even their ordinary herdsboys and shepherds could identify an iron stone (morallana). These ancestors had a furnace technology through which they melted this iron stone (morallana) and shaped it into tools of agriculture, hoes, axes, spears etc. They knew also how to preserve food for a long time and for bad times of harvest. They dried fruits (mangangajane), corn, vegetables by exposing them to the sun. They preserved meat in the same way and made dihwapa. Biltong is a dihwapa product that was copied from Africans. The Basotho had also disiu to preserve their harvest.

These people knew many herbs which had medicinal value. They healed many sicknesses. Some also had the scientific knowledge of embalming important people when they died especially members of the royal families so that their bodies did not decay.

Africans are very rich epistemologically. We are part of them. Some were clairvoyants dealing with matters of spirituality. These are matters that are supernatural. This was at a time when colonialists ridiculed them as “superstitious.” Today, I see that many of them speak about “supernatural” as if it is a new thing. They no longer refer to spiritual matters as “superstition.”

As a people, we must preserve our culture, especially our languages. These languages define who we are. Our humanness – Botho/Ubuntu – is our philosophical outlook and moral guide. It is our Africentric view of the world as against the Eurocentric view of the world. A people without knowledge of their own language are like a person who travels on a borrowed bicycle. Language is a fundamental heritage of a people. We received this precious gift from our forefathers and grandmothers. We have to pass it on untainted to coming generations.

It is appreciated that English the colonial language has become part of our life. It is important for commercial and international communication. It is also important for our heterogeneous nation. Many Nguni-speaking Africans cannot speak Sepedi, Sesotho and Setswana. Likewise many Sotho-speaking people cannot speak Xhosa, Zulu, Ndebele and Swati. It becomes even more difficult for our Venda and Tsonga brothers and sisters. But it is national suicide for us Africans to neglect and under-develop our African languages.

A people who have no language of their own will be devoured. African languages such as Setswana, Sepedi and Sesotho (sa Mohoeshoe) have a lot of philosophy (Bohlale) as reflected in their proverbs (maele).They also have enigmas (lilotho). They have concepts (kutlwisiso or menahano) which are unique and not found in the English language.

1. Here are a few Sesotho proverbs and their approximate meaning in English to illustrate this point:

i). Phuthi e tsoha ka meso e anyese (Punctuality is good practice).

ii). Pela e ne e hloke mohatla ka ho romeletsa (Don’t depend on others to do things for you.

iii). Mphemphe e ea lapisa. Motho o khonoa ka tsa ntlo ea hae. (Dependence is the mother of hunger and humiliation)

iv). Ha lefete khomo le je motho. (Everything must be done to save life)

v). U se ke oa khahloa ke none e feta e hlotsa (Do not get carried away by foreign things)

vi). Marabe o jeoa ke bana. (Parents must sacrifice everything for their children)

vii). Poho e ea ipeha (You are the architect of your destiny)

2. Lilotho Ka Puo Ea Sesotho – enigmas in Sesotho Language. They are meant to train young people to observe and to think.

Here are a few examples:

i). Ke mang monna ya jarang libetsa tsa hae bosiu le mots’eare? (Who is the warrior who carries his weapons day and night?) (noko – porcupine)

ii). Ke eng ntho e mathang Bosiu le mots’eare? (What runs day and night?) ( Noka, River)

iii). Ke mang mohale ya jang lifate? (Who is the warrior who eats trees?) (axe, selepe)

iv). Ke eng ntho e se nang mapheo, empa e nang le lebelo le thijoang ke noka le mangope feela? (What thing is it that has no wings, but runs so fast that only a river or ditch can stop it?) (hlaha –grass fire).

v). Ke mang moholo ea lutseng fats’e bannyane ba  hobela? (Who is the elder sitting down while youngsters dance) (Tree) makala a  sefate branches of a tree)

vi). Ke bo mang Bahlankana ba  basoeu ba  lekanang ba lulang ka  lehaheng? (who are the young men or women who are white and equal in height and live in the cave?) (meno , teeth)

3. Bastardisation of African languages                                   

About 10 years ago I was annoyed by an English man. He had written that most Africans spoke English to the extent that within the next twenty years there would be hardly any Africans who can speak their languages correctly. And that some Europeans would come to teach African languages in schools and universities here because there will be no Africans to teach these languages.

But today I believe he was not very wrong. Many educated Africans are assassinators of African languages. They can hardly speak an African language without mixing it with English. Here are some examples:

Re tshwanela hore re “participate” linthong tsena. Re ya “organiser.” “Re na le “support” e ngata. Ha ke “exaggerate.”  Botsa “anyone.” Ke sa nka “walk.” Ke revisela “di-examination.” Ke batla ho pasa ka “distinction.” Ke “determine” ho ya “univesiting next year.”

This is not the Sesotho that can be described even as Sesotho C. This is   disgraceful “Fanakalo” mess. It manifests a huge dangerous colonial mentality that is prevailing in the country among our people.

Even radio and television announcers and the people they interview are part of this guillotining of African languages. I wonder how elderly people even youngsters understand this assassinated Sepedi, Setswana and Sesotho, particularly in the rural areas, where there is still a semblance of speaking these African languages with respect and eloquence.

4. African languages help decimate false “Empty Land” theory

By custom of Setswana, Sepedi and Sesotho we reared cattle. The cattle had to have the owner’s mark or brand. A cow that has not got your mark is not yours. You cannot claim it in a court of law against the thief or thieves who have stolen it from you. It will be difficult to win a court case against a thief who has already got his mark on it. The thief will win the court case against you.

Equally when you buy a book and you do not write your name on it, you will have difficulty proving in court that the book is yours. But with your name in the book you win hands down.

It is important to know and use the names of places of this country Azania (South Africa) in our African languages. African names in African languages help us to decimate the colonial false theory of “Empty Land” when the colonialists arrived here and took the land from Africans through the barrel of the gun.

Here are examples of Colonial names and indigenous African names:

Pietersburg: Polokwane

Pretoria: Tshwane

Philipolis: Podingtserolo

Zastron: Matlakeng

Pietspruit: Noka Ya Tlou

Klersdorp: Matlakeng

Bloemhof : Teledung

Smithfield : Mofulatshepe

Vryburg: Huhudi

Zeerust :Bohurutse

Caledon  : Mohokare

Warden :Moeding

Aliwal North :Mmaletswai

Bothaville : Khotsong

To know and use African languages for the names of our country including its cities is very important for decolonisation of African minds. There are no towns in Europe bearing African names. Those people are very careful. They know that anything that does not bear your name is difficult to claim. In Europe there are not even streets called after our African Kings or Leaders of the African Liberation struggle against colonialism.

But in this part of Africa our country is full of the marks or brands of Britain and Holland. Some of these names we cannot even pronounce properly. Above all the name of our country bears its colonial name. Our mark Azania has been ignored. No wonder the land is not equitably distributed according population numbers and Africans are sinking deeper and deeper in poverty and cannot afford education for their children – the future of this country.

5. Incapacity to defend misconceptions about Africans      

Negligence of African languages invites ignorance and misconceptions about African cultural concepts. It encourages Europeans to denigrate our languages with impunity. Some professors in their very high institutions of learning call bohali or lobola “bride price” or “bride wealth.” Why can’t they admit that they cannot translate this African cultural concept into their languages? Our daughters and sisters are not goats or cattle. They have never been for sale.

Eurocentricity finds nothing wrong with calling African traditional doctors or herbalists “witchdoctors.” Can a person be a witch and a doctor at the same time?  This is senseless. And why did they call our kings “chiefs” and “chieftainesses”?  Have you ever heard of Chief George or Chieftainess Elizabeth II? By neglecting our African languages we give license to strangers to degrade our cultures by using derogatory terminology. Re kenya metsi ka tlung! They used to call our villages “kraals” but at the same time call where we keep our cattle (masaka) “cattle kraal.”

6. Ignorant interpreters may mislead the judge

We must respect and love our African languages. These languages are part of us. They are our valuable national heritage. Without them we cannot be real people. Many languages have died in the world. Bad Setswana, Sepedi and Sesotho are as good as dead. They create problems when not known properly. Take for instance, court proceedings. The interpreter must know the language well so that the judge can hear the evidence correctly.

For instance, if the accused says, “he provoked me,”  And the prosecutor says, “What was the provocation?”  And the accused says he said, “Mmao.” And the interpreter says, “he said, “your mother.”  “Your mother” in English is very innocent. But this is not what Mmao means in Sesotho. The accused is certain to be acquitted because the judge or magistrate sees nothing wrong with the word “Mmao” – “Your mother.”

In Sesotho “Mmao” is referring to private parts of your mother, depending on the tone and circumstances in which it was used. One would be a big coward if he did not immediately punish the user of such language on a mother. But I think if the Sesotho meaning and context were understood by the judge, he/she would pass the verdict of guilty for the injured party.

Ignorant interpreters of African languages contribute to imprisonment of innocent people. African languages must be taken seriously. In interpretation you do not translate words, you interpret the concept. It is the same thing in Xhosa when you say “Unyoko!” That is a deep wound of insult.

7. Development of African languages is imperative

Our African languages are very rich. But they are slow in having correct words that technology, science and other fields of knowledge are daily brewing. I may sound funny, but words such as Speaker of Parliament, computer, television, chemistry, physics, economics, economy, cell phone, ballistic missiles, hansard, biology, archaeology,  anthropology, theology, history are not Sesotho, Sepedi or Setswana. Proper words must be found for new things.

Developing African languages would put us in a situation where we can acquire some of our education in the medium of our language. Why must we know only English in order to acquire knowledge? Can we not learn carpentry, plumbing, electricity, agriculture or anything in African languages? Is chemistry, engineering, commerce, astronomy inferior when not learned in English?  Our people were astronomers, long time ago in their languages.

Chinese are taught in Chinese. They are today a nuclear power and very advanced nation that is emerging as a world super power. Einstein, a German scientist, invented the bomb. Germans have produced one of the best cars, Mercedes Benz. They do not speak any English. Those who want to learn English learn it as a subject.

They do not use it as a medium of instruction to acquire knowledge. Because we have not developed our African languages we have to learn English first before we acquire knowledge. Does chemistry, mathematics or plumbing become different when taught in African languages? No.

On 29 April 2016, non-English speaking China announced that it will launch its spaceship to Mars in 2020. This is three years from now. This is not time to gamble with African languages through which we could accumulate knowledge faster and easier. Knowledge is power. People who have no knowledge will remain behind.

8. African languages would increase knowledge

North Korea is scaring many big nations today which want to monopolise nuclear weapons.  They have acquired this knowledge in their Korean language. It is the same thing with the Russians. In Africa Amharic and Swahili languages have enabled their people to learn English as a subject but to learn many things through their indigenous or national languages. There is much for African languages to learn from Swahili language.

Their education system has not in any way become inferior to that of the rest of the world. African languages must be developed. Their importance also lies in the fact that they enable Africans to hold the Africentric view of the world instead of being fooled by the Eurocentric view of the world that has no Botho/Ubuntu and is the cause of many global problems today including wars.

English in its origin is a “Fanakalo” language. When stripped of Greek, Latin and KEMETIC, English stands completely naked. Let me give examples of English words that came from Kemetic, an ancient African language of Black Pharaohs long before it was invaded by Greeks, Romans and others. Here are English words from Kemetic language:

Ruit (to engrave): Write

Khenna (boat) : Canoe

Khekh (repulse) : Kick

Koui : Cow

Ra  (sun): Ray (sunlight)

(Introduction To African Civilisations John G. Jackson page 150, See also The Customs Of Mankind by Lillian Eichler and Book Of The Beginnings, Gerald Massey)

Ra is interesting because it is also found in Setswana language and in Sesotho Ramaseli (The Father of Light as one of the names for God.)

 9. Superiority of Sesotho over English

For the word “wash” in the Sesotho language has several words. They describe the word with precision. For example, ho hlapa (washing hands), ho iphotla (washing the face), ho tola ( washing the whole body), ho ikutletsa (washing the feet using a stone), ho hlatswa (washing clothes).

The concept of God is also clearer in African languages. In English He is called God. The meaning is not clear. In Kemet (ancient Egypt) Ra was the name for God. The Venda people call God Raluvhimba. This has the concept of the Greatest One. The old name for God in Zulu is Mvelingqangi – the One Who Came Into Existence On His Own. This is close to the name Ngai for God in Gikuyu language in Kenya. It means one who has no father or mother –“the Creator and Giver of all things.” Sepedi, Setswana and Sesotho and Serotse/Lozi in Zambia call God Modimo – Moholimo – the one who inhabits and reigns in the heavens. The Swahili name for God in Tanzania is Mungu. It means One Who Does Not Discriminate, A Giver. They pray “Mungu abariki Afrika” – God bless Afrika.

10. Problems of English are not African problems

African languages must not concern themselves with the problems of the English language. In European countries that speak English some Christians have a problem with the pronouns “he” and “she” and with the noun “man.” The Sesotho languages say God made man in His image. Some English speaking people say this is “male chauvinism.” The Sesotho Bible uses the word motho – human being – hence ntate o fihlile. Mme o fihlile. Sesotho does not use different pronouns for father and mother.

The English problem of “Chairman”

When it comes to chairman the English speaking people have a problem. Sesotho and Nguni languages have no problem. They are comfortable with modulasetulo and Mgcinisihlalo (chairman). In African languages here it does not show whether the person in the chair is a man or a woman.

The English language has another problem with the pronoun “he,” with reference to God. Sesotho languages have no such problem.

The pronoun that these languages use do not indicate whether God is a man or a woman. African languages are in accord with African Traditional Religion that perceives God as Supreme Spirit.

11.  World’slanguages came from Africa

There is an interesting discovery of where language originated. On 15 April 2011, Science Journal published a study that puzzled many English-speaking people in Britain, Canada, America, Australia and New Zealand. This was a study done by Dr. Kuentin D. Atkinson of Auckland University in New Zealand. This scientific study has found that every language on earth has come from a single pre-historic African mother-tongue.

The 504 languages Dr. Atkinson studied and analysed have been traced to a Stone Age dialect from Africa. Dr. Atkinson has found that “The further away from Africa a language spoken is, the fewer the sounds it has. English has 46 sounds. The San people in South Africa [Azania] use a staggering 200 sounds.” (Science Journal April 2011)

Dr. Atkinson’s study has shown that language evolved at least one hundred thousand years ago. His findings were that every language from English to Mandarin [of the Chinese] evolved from a pre-historic mother tongue spoken in Africa thousands of years ago. He pointed out that “…the number of distinct sounds, in languages tends to increase the closer it is to the Sub-Saharan Africa.”

Prof. Robin Dunbar, an anthropologist at Oxford University, has confirmed that “Languages grew from a seed in Africa.” (New York Times 14 April 2011)

For his part Prof.  Mark Pagel of Reading University in England has confirmed that this same effect can be seen also in D.N.A. Africans have much greater genetic diversity than Europeans.

12.  Sotho and Nguni languages admired

The worst enemies of Africans in South Africa have admitted the musical charm of Sesotho and Nguni languages. H.R. Abercrombie in his book Africa’s Peril (page 45) has observed, “Now we come to an entirely different type of individual classed collectively as Bantu, of many tribes, but probably of common origin. Their language is full of musical charm and lends itself to flights of oratory. It is expressive and of perfect construction. The two great branches of this are known as Zulus or Matebele and Basuto.”

How can we throw away our golden languages that have so much beauty and history of being the mother of European languages? The superiority of African poetry is such that its concepts cannot be easily translated into English. This is where a proverb of our languages warns us:

“U SE KE OA KHAHLOA KE NONE E FETA E HLOTSA”   “UNGALAHLI MBO YAKHO NGOPHOYIYANA” [DO NOT GET CARRIED AWAY TOO MUCH BY FOREIGN THINGS.]

*DR MOTSOKO PHEKO delivered this address at the Department of Languages University of South Africa, 12 October 2016.

Source: Pambazuka

WHERE ARE AFRICAN SCHOLARS IN AFRICAN STUDIES?

Prof. Ali Mazuri

By Yusuf Serunkuma

Many postcolonial regimes are still mired in protracted civil wars and violence, struggling economies, corruption, bad leadership, broken social and economic infrastructure and famine.  It is rather dishonest for a country whose main university could be closed for months by presidential decree, whose professors strike year in year out over emoluments, to complain about an overwhelming European or American presence in their studies.

A white European friend tells a story of a panel on ‘African sexuality’ he attended in London sometime in 2005.  Among other things, the panel discussed intimacy, sexual pleasure, anal sex, marital rape and genital beautification or mutilation—all from what was considered the vantage point of the African. Not only was the panel exclusively white, a large section of the audience was also white. With whiteness symbolically read as being European or North American, it translated not only into foreignness to the topics being discussed, but also privileged grandchildren of colonial masters gazing at Africans.  Where were the African academics, at least, marked by their shiny dark or brown skins? Were they invited but failed to get transport? Did these European and North Americans really understand, and accurately and objectively bring out the intricate and many secret details of ‘African sexuality’? These questions sparked off a long-winded conversation, which, despite its liveliness, left one key question unanswered: Where were the African scholars?

With the exception of a few celebrity names—who actually make quite a list—African studies remain dominated, discursively and institutionally, by non-African scholars: African studies associations are not only headquartered in European and North American universities, but also hold their annual conferences in Europe and North America. During these conferences, it is very common to find specific country caucuses (Ugandan, Kenyan, Nigerian or Somali) with majority scholars of European and North American descent.  Part of the explanation for this is that African scholars cannot afford to travel to Europe and North America for these sessions.  Location may not necessarily be the issue, but the numerical superiority of whiteness in these plenaries (and in publications) has been concern for many non-white academics and their students as they grumble under their breath bemoaning the continued colonization, marginalization and scholarly misrepresentation. 

It is also true that ‘leading journals’ in African studies are not only headquartered in Europe and North America, but many are mostly edited by European and American academics. Many times, the contributions to these journals reproduce similar patterns.  On the other hand, there are only a few African studies associations or journals on Africa, based on the African continent, managed, contributed to and edited by African hands.  The problem is then framed with whiteness being not just a timeless symbolism of continued colonial domination and marginalization of Africans, but also of biased, unrepresentative, inaccurate, and epistemologically flawed scholarship.

Our conversation unfolded against the above backdrop, with the bells of decolonization and the rise of the “African intellectual” ringing nearby.  As a self-reflective white male, he was visibly guilty of their continued ‘crimes’ to African studies but did not see a clear exit.  Should he back off and let African studies to Africans, or start co-authoring all his pieces with ‘African’ co-authors?  Exactly, in the age of decolonization and the rise of the African university, why do white people, these grandchildren of colonial masters, continue to speak for, write about formerly colonized peoples to the point of dominating disciplines? This often translates into defining the terms of the discipline, which are often, the charge goes, Eurocentric.  Why don’t they let the Africans write, represent and speak for and about themselves especially on ‘inner’ subjects such as sexuality? Why don’t white folks sit back and listen and learn? How accurate is this knowledge produced by foreigners about people they barely know? In other words, why don’t they heed Spivak?

There are three assumptions behind these charges:  First, there exists a world stage of ‘competitive scholarship’ where continents, countries, nationalities, special groups such as women and ‘minorities’ seek not only accurate representation, but also equal participation.  Accurate representation and active participation are taken as not only signifying but also granting access to power (respect, resources, pride etc.), which is the envy of the world.  It then follows that inaccurate representation, and the absence of participation translates into, symbolically and practically, denial of power and substantive existence, as colonialism defined. 

Secondly, presence and participation guarantees not just a leveled playing field, but also objective scholarship, that is, neutral, representative or even accurate.  The ‘native’ has to be listened to, since nobody understands them like themselves.  Without seeming to essentialize nativity or indigeneity, it is agreeable that there is a certain sensibility, an awareness that comes with belonging, and inhabiting the particular space under study.

The third assumption is that white scholars have actively sidelined African scholars just the way their grandparents who colonized the continent did. In other words, just like their grandparents, white scholars still patronize the native to speak about themselves.  An equal presence of Africans in intellectual spaces, with perhaps equal power and learning, will not only point in the direction of complete liberation but also acknowledgement of the African as a free and thinking subject.

Although we should be sympathetic to this tone of conversation, it is my contention that it is improperly framed in ways that are not only ahistorical and essentialist, but also dishonest to current social-political conditions of the African peoples.  The invisibility of the ‘African academic’ in African studies is undeniable.  However, to demand grandchildren of former colonial masters to leave African studies to African academics—as a way of decolonizing African studies, or ensuring accurate and objective representation is misleading.  

Secondly, even to demand equal participation, say through ‘affirmative inclusion’ does not sound like decolonizing the academy.  It is actually one way of re-affirming an insubordinate position.  The one with the power to invite and recruit does have power to define the terrain of the debate.  Instead of asking how to decolonize the academy through more ‘African participation,’ my argument seeks to point to the challenges of representation, and the problem with seeking presence of ‘African scholars in African studies.’ This is not to argue that the concern over the absence is completely misplaced, rather my intention is to reframe the ways in which we approach and think about scholars, and their subjects in our so-called ‘African studies.’ My overall aim is to draw our attention to the history of the present, and how our intellectual history cannot be divorced from the political and economic histories of the present.

***

Let’s start from the beginning: The category, ‘African’ often remains problematic. Despite the attractiveness of claiming and theorizing the ‘African worldview,’ and ‘African identity,’ (Soyinka 1975, Mbembe 2002) African, as an analytical category (besides its political—as used in international relations—and geographical reference), is vague and difficult. I have never understood ‘African’ in African studies, African literature, African philosophy or African culture.  It is not just that African cannot be homogenous, but also ‘African’ cannot be exclusive of other traditions—new and old.  Indeed, one of the most eloquent critiques against Mazrui’s (2005) notion of Africa having triple heritage is that he reduced the African heritage to just three (perhaps painfully closing out Chinese and Indian influences whose presence remains most visible in our times).  By being open to other traditions and changing in time and space, often in individually stylized forms (Mbembe 2002) sufficiently denies it conceptual and analytical crust. In the age of capitalist expansion, Ahmed Aijaz (1992) argues, the world has become more connected through production and consumption and the opposition of the 99% to the excesses of capital.  What then constitutes ‘African’ both as an identity and an analytical category? What are these identities outside geography and the politics of international relations?  What is the ‘first intelligibility’ of Africanness? Even in its smaller denominations—Ugandan, Nigerian or Kenyan—it does not make conceptual sense.

Secondly, indigeneity never translates into ‘authentic’ scholarship. Although it is true that inhabiting and belonging accords a certain awareness and sensitivity, it does not follow that to be is to know.  Neither does it follow that the outsider is infinitely locked out of these locational and membership acquired knowledge systems and experiences.  Claims that Ugandans, Kenyans or women are the best suited to write about their realities have only gained currency with the rise of “bad scholarship,” especially with the decline of philological engagement (Said, 2003). Said’s critique in Orientalism was meant to question bad scholarship, unmasking both the eyes with which (especially European) scholars read the Other, and the politico-economic projects that, sometimes inadvertently, informed their scholarship.  Re-introducing his project in 2003, Said advocated a robust process of academic inquiry, which required ‘a profound humanistic spirit deployed with generosity and…hospitality’ where ‘the interpreter's mind actively makes a place in it for a foreign Other’ (Said, 2003: xix). Said stressed the idea of making space for the foreign other as the most important process of good scholarship.  This process, he argued, entailed ‘knowledge of other peoples and other times that is the result of understanding, compassion, careful study, and analysis for their own sakes’ (ibid).  Here, scholarship becomes an entire body and soul immersion of the scholar. The scholar seeks to become like the community they study. They “deeply” live with, and learn the language and “cultures” of the people under study. Put differently, they become “naturalized” members.  The scholar tries as they possibly could to understand the community on its internal logics.  Following this schema, knowledge, with all its trappings of power, remains an active process of cultivation and learning, not just experience and belonging.  Even language, which is believed to come more naturally to man, comes with conscious learning, not simply birth or location.

Third, the notion of ‘objectivity’ often pitched in this context to mean truthful, accurate, neutral, representative scholarship is one claim that is good for absolutely nothing. Without mixing this up with demands for rigor, all scholarship is biased depending on the questions and vantage point of the author (Foucault 1975, Usman 2006; Khaldun 1967). This is not to argue that the search for facts is a meaningless exercise. Instead, this suggests that facts do not interpret themselves. Indeed, there is neither a singular interpretation nor a singular internal logic. The exercise of interpretation is nothing but a subjective engagement—wound around questions, politics, and different forms of violence.  It is the moment.  Indeed, all sources, disciplines and the conclusions reached are often political in the sense that they are intended to respond to the present.

If the above grounds are agreeable, that is, abundance or demand for philological scholarship on African subjects by non-African scholars, and the absolute unimportance of any quests for objectivity, why then does the question of ‘African scholars in the African studies’ persist?  Without seeking to dismiss the question entirely, we need to establish the intellectual project behind it. Is it objective scholarship? Total liberation? Equality? Despite being widely articulated as a concern for total liberation and breaking with the yoke of domination and marginalization, my contention is that neither of the above explains the persistence of this question, except the “catharsis of visibility:” A symbolism of access to power (resources, pride and respect) on the global academic stage, Africans long numerical presence to be seen as owning their scholarship.  However, we can define “African” only in geographic and diplomatic terms (citizenship), which also do not allow us analytical and conceptual depth in the context of the present. If defined as men and women born, raised and educated on the African continent or with African ancestry and with visible identifiable features especially black or brown skin, this will be good but for absolutely nothing. Firstly, it is half analysis since it does not contextualize the general absence of Africans (scholars, power centers, footballers, technicians, inventors, medicine) in all “competitive” global spaces.  Secondly, it is not interested in assessing the quality of production focusing entirely on who produces what.  Third, it seeks to treat scholarship as an exclusive terrain operating outside politics and economics.

Besides any racist undertones it mobilizes on the part of the African, whiteness remains a symbolically powerful synecdoche for colonial marginalization and domination in all things African. My point is that we need to frame our reflex to this history differently, in ways that seek to appreciate and embrace it rather than angrily bash it to the point of asking present European and American scholars to apologize for it.  The critique against the absence of African scholars is often pitched in the language of complete decolonization of the academy, as a search for African knowledge traditions, and full (sometimes, exclusive) participation of African peoples.  This is a vanity endeavor.  This approach actually dissociates scholarship from the politics of the present—the present inherited from different moments in history.  To put it differently, claims for ‘total liberation’ of formerly colonized places remain only but essentialist.  David Scott insightfully reminds us that the language of total liberation problematically suggests a story of romantic overcoming where ‘our pasts can be left behind and new futures leapt into (Scott, 2004: 135).’  Scott urges that formerly colonized peoples ought to see their history as a story of tragedy which demands ‘a more respectful attitude to the past, to the often-cruel permanence of its impress (ibid).’ Rather than angry resentment, this history ought to be respected acknowledging that the terrain in which scholarship (and many other fields) is engaged on the world stage was radically reordered by history (colonialism, structural adjustment etc.) both epistemologically and numerically.

At the same time, it is helpful to be mindful of the present challenges of the postcolonial state and how these do not only affect scholarship in formerly colonized places, but other aspects of life. Many postcolonial regimes are still mired in protracted civil wars and violence, struggling economies, corruption, bad leadership, broken social and economic infrastructure and famine.  It is rather dishonest for a country whose main university could be closed for months by presidential decree, whose professors strike year in year out over emoluments, to complain of an overwhelming European or American presence in their studies.  Such countries produce more raw materials for scholarship (for foreign scholars) than scholars.  It does not matter whether these conditions are a legacy of colonialism (Mamdani 1996; Rodney 1972, dependency theorists) or the present political elite is responsible for them (Cooper 2007).  As long as this remains the condition on the continent, in addition to an irredeemably reordered scholarly terrain, ‘African’ scholars, at the level of numbers, will remain invisible in African studies.

* Yusuf Serunkuma Kajura is a PhD Fellow, Makerere Institute of Social Research (MISR), Makerere University.

A TALE OF TWO GIANTS: SOBUKWE AND MANDELA

Comrade Robert Sobukwe

By Lebohang Liepollo Pheko

Extremely feared in life and in death, South African anti-apartheid revolutionary leader Sobukwe remains largely silenced as all attention has been lavished on Mandela. Subukwe articulated an uncompromising internationalist vision with Afrika at the centre. He eschewed multi-racialism and a narrow nationalism. Restoring land to Black people was at the heart of his praxis of liberation.

It is an odd fluke that these two men arrived and departed from this earth on the same day: Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe was born on 5 December 1924 while Mandela died on the same date three years ago.  Initially counterparts in the ANC Youth League, their profound tactical differences and deep ideological and intellectual crevices were apparent right from early on. The irony of their proximity is all the more bizarre given the consistent and deliberate erasure of Sobukwe’s contribution to the Azanian and indeed global African lexicon in contrast to the effusive celebration that Nelson Mandela enjoyed in life and in death.

Sobukwe’s ideas on Africanist and African thought are canons throughout the ages and the schisms between the two men emerged as early as 1940s when the ANC Youth League was formed to respond to what South African youth believed to be the inertia of the struggle. Sobukwe, Lembede and AP Mda were among the leading lights that galvanised the Defiance Campaign and strongly opposed the policy of multi-racialism that they deemed to be a dangerous mechanism to privilege minority rights. 

Sobukwe et al were extremely dissatisfied with the growing influence that the White-led Communist Party of South Africa had and by 1956 he was part of the Africanist group. Sobukwe diagnosed the South African colonial question by saying:

“The Europeans are a foreign group which has exclusive control of political, economic, social and military power. It is the dominant group. It is the exploiting group, responsible for the pernicious doctrine of white supremacy, which has resulted in the political humiliation and degradation of the indigenous African people.’

In 1959, the pressure was too much and the Africanists led by Sobukwe with AP MDA, AB Ngcobo and others left to form the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC).

Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and other leading members of the ANC Youth League remained in what Sobukwe considered to be a captured ANC. Capture clearly did not begin at Saxonwolde. In his memoirs, Mandela described the actions of the Africanist camp as immature, without a prospect of success. He also conceded that he felt intimidated by the intellectual vigour of his erstwhile friends and comrades Sobukwe and Lembede.

The men differed not only in tactics but also in allies. For Sobukwe and the PAC, the basis of any reconstituted society had to be African since Africans are indigenous to this country, are the majority and are the labour base.

The ANC preferred and stressed the importance of a multi–racial South Africa. Much of the leadership was at that time centred on urban mobilisation and concentrated on building an educated urban cadreship. The usurpation and distraction of a colonial liberation struggle into a Black/White issue was and remains one of the greatest fissures in the South African liberation narrative.

It is this that removed Afrikan liberation, decolonisation and land restitution from the centre of what Sobukwe articulated as the overriding reason to enter armed struggle through POQO. It translated the complexity of land occupation into race relations, anti-apartheid movement, more in keeping with the civil rights movement of the United States. POQO considered itself to have more in common with the Mau Mau in Kenya than freedom riders in Mississippi.

When Mr Mandela announced that he had fought White domination and would then fight Black domination, it was clear that the decades of ideological disagreement between himself and Sobukwe, by extension the ANC and the PAC, remained intact.

The outflow of the positive action campaign was of course the historical Sharpeville Uprising of 21 March 1960 about which Sobukwe said that greatest benefit was the loss of ‘fear of consequences of disobeying the colonial laws’. He heroically refused to plead for clemency from the settler colonial regime, arguing that it was illegitimate.  A year later, Nelson Mandela repeated these sentiments and because officialdom continues to fear Sobukwe’s voice, even in his death, the mythology of these courageous words have been wrongly attributed to Tata Mandela.

Having been imprisoned for the Sharpeville Uprising, Sobukwe and other PAC cadres began to mobilise and politicise the hardened criminals that they did hard labour with. Indeed the Institute of Race Relations conducted a survey that indicated that the Africanist camp had ignited the national and even international imagination. Their 1963 survey indicated 57% support for the PAC, 39% for the ANC and 31% for the Liberal Party.

All this within just a year of PAC’s formation. Perhaps most potent contribution that Mangaliso Sobukwe made was in his ability to describe an internationalist vision with Afrika at the centre. Similar to Cabral he eschewed narrow nationalism and spoke against what he characterised as fashionable doctrine of ‘exceptionalism.’  He opined that South Africa was deeply embedded in the broader African continent and the global African experience and strongly maintained that isolationism - which the Pretoria colonial regime was trying to instil in the African majority – could not be part of the Africanist narrative.

‘Prof’, as he was affectionately known, spoke clearly on economic restitution and articulated the process required to achieve equitable distribution of wealth through industrial development. He recognised that rural poverty was causing immense pressure on the inevitable urban population, and in anticipation of governing, begun to co-create ideas to bring the Afrikan majority to the centre of economic vibrancy. At the centre of Sobukwe’s praxis of liberation was land.

The official story of Nelson Mandela is of a moderate nationalist who perhaps hoped for peaceful transition until this hope went up in the flames of the Sharpeville Uprising. Although he has been quoted as saying ‘I was bitter and felt ever more strongly that SA whites need another Isandlwana,’ most of these sentiments were laid aside in favour of the negotiated settlement.

Perhaps Sobukwe would have noted that the settlement has displaced more people particularly the Afrikan majority.  The Government of National Unity was characterised by some critics as a deeply compromised response to a revolutionary threat posed by African workers. The GNU attempts to bind the workers’ organizations to the bourgeoisie.  Naomi Klein noted that “Mandela, in his first postelection interview as president, carefully distanced himself from his previous statements favouring nationalization. ‘In our economic policies, there is not a single reference to things like nationalization, and this is not accidental: There is not a single slogan that will connect us with any Marxist ideology.’” Klein continuess, “they remained firmly in the hands of the same four white-owned mega conglomerates that also control 80% of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. In 2005, only 4% of the companies listed on the exchange were owned by Blacks.”

This stands in some contrast to Sobukwe’s ideology that rejected ‘economic exploitation of the many for the benefit of the few‘.

In remembering the two men, the irreconcilable schisms in their politics and economic policy require examination. While Mandela had the opportunity to grow and extend his influence globally, the tragedy of Sobukwe is that in life his voice was silenced and feared. The celebration of his birth gives us the ongoing possibility of at last hearing his voice loudly pronouncing on the conditions and politics of the current era with profound prescience.

Giants, indeed, never die.

* Lebohang Liepollo Pheko is Senior Research Fellow, The Trade Collective, Managing Director - Four Rivers Trading, Steering Member - South African Women in Dialogue [SAWID] and Board Member and Africa Regional Coordinator - International Network on Migration and Development. 

Source: Pambazuka