Don’t let opposition destabilise Zim
Don’t let opposition destabilise ZimLAST month, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe experienced opposition-sponsored violence that created a frenzy in the Western media and missions, but more so for Harare than Kinshasa. Here in Zimbabwe some Western ambassadors just fell short of chanting MDC slogans and waving the opposition’s open palm symbol. The Herald caught up with the DRC Ambassador to Zimbabwe, MR MAWAMPANGA MWANA NANGA to talk about the situation in his country, the role of third forces and the prospects for long-term stability, among other things.
Q: Ambassador Mwana Nanga, your country recently held its first elections in 45 years, but it seems in the wake of the poll there is still no respite. What exactly is the problem?
A: The problem in the DRC is that of the sheer size of the country and its wealth. What happened during the post-election era was that we had post-election violence in two areas.
In Bakongo Province where the opposition was disorganised and lost the governorship elections, we did not get a majority but some of the independents crossed over and came to our side and that’s what gave us the majority. That was when the opposition cried foul and there was post-election violence in which at least 120 people were killed. That was very bad because we do not condone violence. But now it is quiet.
The other pocket of instability where we had post-election violence was in the capital city itself. This was due to the fact that out of the four vice presidents, two had their armed guards — up to 500 soldiers each. At some point the government said that you have to let your soldiers integrate into the national army because you are no longer warlords, you are no longer vice presidents, but you are just citizens who are part of government, there is only one government. So the second vice president who had armed guards did not pose any problems — that was Mr Azarius Ruberwa. But Jean Pierre Bemba was the challenger who did not swallow his defeat. He refused to integrate his militia and the national army had to do what armies do everywhere, which was to disarm them and in the process of disarming them more than 120 people died. But now they have been disarmed. Then the other military person we had in the Equateur Province has surrendered his weapons.
So right now there is peace. Jean Pierre Bemba has gone to Portugal for treatment, but politically he is more or less finished, and I do not think he will come back anytime soon. But you will still hear about some problems in the DRC, security-wise, this is because, as I said, of the sheer size of the country.
In the eastern parts where all the problems come from, we have two pockets of potential instability: the two Kivus (Nord Kivu and Sud Kivu) which border Rwanda and Burundi and the Eastern Province, especially the Ituri district which borders Sudan and Uganda. You know those countries have their own instability. Whenever they have problems, their rebels use the DRC as a rear base and then problems arise.
Only this week there was a meeting of the chiefs of staff from Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and the DRC. They agreed that they are going to work together so that no country is used as a rear base. We work together to disarm the negative forces in the DRC, Uganda, or Rwanda.
Q: You referred there to the size of your country, and we know that since Independence in 1960 you have faced challenges of peace and security that precluded you from developing adequate infrastructure. How did the election go? Did you manage to cover the whole country? And how did the opposition receive the results?
A: Thanks to all the support we got from the international community, the election was held nationwide. Our lack of infrastructure only delayed the publication of the results, the results were published about a month after the election. But by using helicopters, aeroplanes, waterways, we were able to hold the elections all over the country.
Now as to the acceptance of the results by the opposition, well, you know everywhere when somebody loses, especially in Africa, they never accept the results. As a matter of fact, as I speak today, there are still about a hundred cases pending in our parliament, a hundred MPs whose election is still pending the decision of the Supreme Court, so they are still challenging. Out of 500 MPs at least 400 MPs are unchallenged.
Q: And the observer missions, what was their verdict?
A: Everybody hailed our election as having been free, transparent and democratic, all the observers.
Many did not believe that in such a big country with devastated infrastructure we could hold that exercise, but we did hold it and it was hailed by everybody as a good exercise.
Q: You said you had four vice presidents and one of them was causing problems, and, of course, Mr Ruberwa did not. What about the other two?
A: Of the four vice presidents, two were elected senators, one of whom is Mr Jean Pierre Bemba, who was the challenger. He is supposed to be a senator for the Metropolitan Province of the capital city of Kinshasa, but because of what he did, he may now lose his immunity because he may have to be tried for treason.
As for the other two, Mr Azarius Ruberwa I think he will go back to his private practice as a lawyer and as chief of his political party, and in certain provinces we even have a coalition with him to try and get a majority. So he is playing the opposition game as he should. The other one was a presidential candidate but he got less than 1 percent of the vote, so I do not know what he will do.
Q: The reaction by Mr Bemba was very interesting. Do you think he was his own man, or was being egged on by other forces?
A: I think that Mr Bemba was being used by our enemies against his own will. You know, our enemies are very clever, they can use you without you knowing you are being used.
I think Mr Bemba fell into that trap. He thought he could keep on thumping his nose at authority, just like what Mr Tsvangirai does here, thinking his backers would come and save him, but when the going gets tough, you see them lying low and they won't even come to help you.
That I think was the trap in which Mr Bemba fell, but it’s difficult to prove who his backers were because they are very smart.
Q: But have the other opposition parties accepted the government?
A: The problem with opposition parties, by their very nature, is that they always try to disturb the powers-that-be and when you make a mistake, fall into a trap, they will grab the power.
So in the short term, we can say they are lying low because of what was done to Mr Jean Pierre Bemba, so nobody is trying to cause havoc. But we are not fooled into thinking they will lie low for the whole of the five years. It’s up to the government to be smart and know when to crack down and know when to let them exercise their democratic opposition activities. If they just want to speak, we will let them speak, but if they want to create havoc and instability, then we have to be tough.
Q: Two questions: What was the response of the Western missions in your country when all this was going on? And how do you respond to claims in certain quarters of the Western world that you used excessive force?
A: The reaction of the Western countries was very interesting.
You see, these countries are very strange, when there is no law and the government does not take action, they say there is lawlessness. When the government takes action, they say you went too far. Their missions came up with a declaration that was even beyond the prerogatives granted them by the Geneva Convention because they are not supposed to interfere.
They were interfering, saying the government used excessive force, and were even protecting Bemba’s soldiers, these MONUC (French acronym for the United Nations Peacekeeping Mission in the Congo) people, they transported them even after they were defeated. But on the other hand, we have to give them credit because none of them accepted Mr Bemba to come and take asylum in any of their embassies. Instead, he went into the South African Embassy.
Q: Given the instability that has been going on for years with armed militias all over, what is the government doing to ensure long-term stability? You talked there of working with Rwanda, Uganda and Sudan, but these countries also have their own problems?
A: First of all, it’s very difficult when you have a country the size of the DRC, which is almost like Western Europe, to say you crush some rebels once and for all.
There will always be somebody somewhere who wants to be a dissident. The only thing we can do as a government is to build up our armed forces, and we are busy doing that with the co-operation of our friends.
Angola has been giving us a lot of help, and as you saw with what happened in Tanzania at the Sadc summit, we got overwhelming support.
So you work both on diplomacy and strengthening your armed forces and making sure that whenever somebody tries to raise his ugly head as a rebel, you go and hit him as strongly as you possibly can so he will think twice before he can do it again.
So because most of the problems come from the east, we have a structure called the Quadripartite Commission which sits at Kisangani, and in that commission we have Uganda, Rwanda and the DRC, with the US as a neutral party. So whenever we have problems in those borders, we go to that commission and try to talk it over before any action is taken.
The other thing that we are doing is we are getting help from the European Union, namely Belgium, and our Sadc friends, particularly Angola, to integrate our armed forces.
You know we had a lot of rebels who took up arms, so allthose are being integrated into one army. Those who no longer want anything to do with arms are being demobilised and given severance packages and so on. We are very happy with it.
Q: At the heart of the problems in the DRC, since 1961, is the issue of the country’s vast resources. Western countries that have been sponsoring destabilisation activities would want to continue looting those resources. What are you doing to ensure that your country benefits from its resources?
A: The first thing we did was to change our constitution.
A lot of power was devolved to the provinces. They get 40 percent of all the taxes that are raised within the province and that gives them a lot of say in how the resources are managed.
When you centralise power too much, it gives the Western countries the opportunity to try and run your country by remote control.
Once they get one sell-out person, like they did with Moise Tshombe and Mobutu Sese Seko in the past, then they ensure that they have control of all the resources.
However, when you decentralise, then those who live with the resources they have a say, and it’s very difficult to go and buy all of them because they want to have a role to play.
For instance, during the transition period of our vice presidents, the power was so structured that the companies were doing a lot of bad things on the ground.
When the new elected province of Katanga came into office, they found out that a lot of our minerals were going out without being processed in the country to create jobs. So they stopped all that and said if you want to mine here you have to create jobs. Now that is being done.
So with the new constitution it is very difficult for those countries or multinational corporations to come and bribe, say, the minister of mines or some other minister, to come and get everything for free.
So when you have a country the size of Western Europe it’s very difficult to rule it from one point.
For instance, Katanga Province alone is bigger than Zimbabwe. So that’s why we came up with this decentralised government.
Q: Zimbabwe experienced opposition-sponsored violence all of last month, and as a citizen of a country that has not known peace since 1961, what advice can you give those being used in the destabilisation activities?
A: There is a saying in French that goes, "Le chien avoire la caravane passe (The dog can bark but the caravan keeps on passing)."
The Government should just let the opposition make its noise and concentrate on the business of running the country. They should not give them the opportunity to destabilise. We have been destabilised so much, and Jean Pierre Bemba was the latest. He was just 300 metres away from State House with his militia, he almost grabbed power. So the government did what it had to do — it went and crushed his militia. If he had not fled into the South African Embassy, he probably would be a dead man today.
So my advice to my brothers here is: just get on with the business of running the country, don’t give them (the opposition) the chance to destabilise, run the country for the benefit of the people. Let the opposition do the talking. In my language there is a saying: "Hot water does not burn clothes."
They can make all the noise they want but it will not make a difference.
Feedback: caesar.zvayi zimpapers.co.zw
Labels: AMBASSADOR, DRC, THE HERALD, ZIMBABWE
posted by MrK @ 4:25 PM
1 Comments:
When you centralise power too much, it gives the Western countries the opportunity to try and run your country by remote control.
Once they get one sell-out person, like they did with Moise Tshombe and Mobutu Sese Seko in the past, then they ensure that they have control of all the resources.
However, when you decentralise, then those who live with the resources they have a say, and it’s very difficult to go and buy all of them because they want to have a role to play.
For instance, during the transition period of our vice presidents, the power was so structured that the companies were doing a lot of bad things on the ground.
When the new elected province of Katanga came into office, they found out that a lot of our minerals were going out without being processed in the country to create jobs. So they stopped all that and said if you want to mine here you have to create jobs. Now that is being done.
So with the new constitution it is very difficult for those countries or multinational corporations to come and bribe, say, the minister of mines or some other minister, to come and get everything for free.
So when you have a country the size of Western Europe it’s very difficult to rule it from one point.
For instance, Katanga Province alone is bigger than Zimbabwe. So that’s why we came up with this decentralised government.
Wow. I would go even further than that, and decentralize to the district or better local council level.
However, for a country the size of the DRC, it makes a lot of sense to decentralize, AT LEAST to the provincial level - which are the size of a country to begin with.
However, I think even that is not going far enough.
But the idea that decentralization could be a solution to corruption, especially western companies' corruption, is a very interesting one.
I get the same feeling about Magande, that someone here has been bribed, to be so enthusatic and defend these terrible mining contracts.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home