Botswana: “Africa’s new democracy”?

THE plight of the Bushmen in Botswana is well documented. In a sign of desperation the vulnerable group a few days ago appealed to Pope Benedict XVI to support them in their struggle to return to their land, as the Vatican established diplomatic relations with Botswana earlier this month.

“We beg the Pope to help, to pray for us so that the government changes its attitude towards us and respects our rights as indigenous peoples of this land,” said a spokesman for the Bushmen this week.

Despite Botswana’s High Court having affirmed the Bushmen’s rights to live in their reserve in 2006, the government of the new president General Ian Seretse Khama continues to violate their rights.

It has given the company Gem Diamonds permission to mine diamonds on Bushmen land.

Not one Bushman has received a hunting permit since the High Court ruling, making it unlawful for the government to withhold permits. None of the Bushmen have been allowed to access borehole water on their land. Hunting and borehole water are the backbone of Bushmen life. Life is now extremely difficult for them.

The appeal to the Pope was not coincidental. On 1 July, the Pope expressed his solidarity and support for the indigenous peoples of Raposa-Serra do Sol in Brazil when he met them in the Vatican and declared “We will do everything possible to help protect your land.”

These autochthonous peoples have a right to their land. They have an emotional historical connection to these lands Their linguistic, cultural and social/organizational identity is through these lands. Infact, their existence is expressed through the lands from which they are being evicted.

The colonizing or expansionary activities of the Batswana government today threatens this group.

This is the case with the Indians of Raposa–Serra do Sol; the Dongria Kondh living in the Niyamgiri Hills in Orissa, India; the (Red) Indians of North America; the Maoris of New Zealand; the Aborigines of Australia; the Masai and Ogiek of Kenya: the Innu of Canada – the list is endless, but the plight is the same.

These groups share one common characteristic – their governments are purportedly democratic. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, U.S., and India are considered thriving democracies. Botswana and Kenya are said to be models of democracy on the African continent.

A majority of these countries also share an interesting similarity: they control the big mining companies and conglomerates.

Large mining projects in these regions take place in rural areas, where they coexist with indigenous communities, and they advance at the same time as many of these communities become poorer and poorer.

India, Canada and Australia have moved significant groups of indigenous peoples from their lands to open up areas for uranium and other mining; and have failed to compensate them.

Where the indigenous have stayed, the consequences have been dire.

Examples suffice. Traditional heads opposed uranium mining in Meghalaya (India) and members of a Special Operations Team (SOT) of Meghalaya police killed five militants of the Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC) last year. In the U.S., the House Committee clashed with federal agencies whom they accused of incompetence in dealing with the mess left from uranium mining on Navajo land. A study found that the cancer rate doubled among Aborigines near Ranger mine (Australia).

Botswana’s Bushmen

Closer to home, in Botswana, the plight of the Bushmen cannot be overemphasized.

A recent study of the plight of the modern Bushmen revealed some troubling statistics. 90% have been forced to abandon their traditional hunter/gatherer lifestyle and merge with pastural/urbanized.

The Botswana government and De Beers/Anglo American interests have been responsible for pushing away (colonizing) the Bushmen who, according to anthropologists, ethnologists and paleontologists, have inhabited Southern Africa for at least 40,000 years.

This is the plight of indigenous peoples, who are minorities in their own countries.

Khama, Conservation International and Sadc

Botswana President Ian Khama recently snubbed a Southern African Development Community summit to discuss problems in Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Many reasons were advanced for that snub. It has now emerged that he was attending a meeting of Conservation International in the United States at a time when the summit was going on in South Africa.

President Khama is reported to have made “prior arrangements” to attend the U.S. meeting and could not substitute it for a crisis meeting in the region.

Conservation International is an NGO and there have been concerns in Botswana as to President Khama’s eligibility to sit on an NGO board whilst also serving as a Head of State.

But, that is not the main issue. The issue is that President Khama has been responsible for the plight of the Bushmen. Infact, Khama and his predecessor, Festus Mogae, have presided over this “colonisation” of Bushmen lands and have been rewarded for it.

Former President Mogae was recently awarded a prize for “exemplary leadership” – the Mo Ibrahim prize for “good governance”.

Giving an “Achievement In Africa Leadership Award” to Mogae was an ironic twist that left the Bushmen flabbergasted. They cried: “We don’t think he should receive this award because of how he treated us when he was President of Botswana. He evicted us from our ancestral land and that has really affected our lives. He put us into poverty, HIV-AIDS and alcoholism.”

Survival International wrote: “Festus Mogae's government evicted the Bushmen from their ancestral land in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve in 2002, and banned them from hunting and gathering.

“Bushman hunters were arrested and tortured; those protesting peacefully against the evictions were arrested and shot at; and at least one woman died of starvation and thirst when Mogae's government shut down the borders of the reserve.”

The Mo Ibrahim Prize consists of US$ 5 million over 10 years and US$ 200,000 annually for life thereafter. Interestingly, the committee awarding the prize included former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, one of the “Elders” recently denied entry in Zimbabwe.

Does good governance not demand respect for people, especially minorities? President Mogae's tenure overturned decades of respect for Bushmen land rights and makes a mockery of the Mo Ibrahim prize.

President Khama, who is a Board Member of Conservation International (the only Head of State), makes a mockery of that NGO by denying the Bushmen their rights.

Conservation International says of its mission: “We believe that the Earth's natural heritage must be maintained if future generations are to thrive spiritually, culturally, and economically. Our mission is to conserve the Earth's living heritage – our global biodiversity – and to demonstrate that human societies are able to live harmoniously with nature.”

Ironically, the natural heritage of the Bushmen is not maintained; the Bushmen do not “thrive spiritually, culturally, and economically” today and they are not “living harmoniously with nature” in Botswana.

The irony of “democracies”

This is the irony of democracies. It is inseparable from big business interests. Richard Branson (and other big businesses) is reportedly supportive of, and funds, the Group of Elders. He is the epitome of big business and has huge interests in the region. The mining conglomerates: Anglo-American etc fund research projects on “democracy” and big-business-friendly Governments go high up the “Index of Democracy” ladder every year.

Kenya, with its appalling record on violence and corruption, is heralded a thriving African democracy; never mind the failing State, with all the aid being pumped in.

Botswana, with its appalling attitude and neo-colonial attitude towards a 4,000 year legacy of the Bushmen, is considered a thriving democracy. It is the only country that still has customary (judicial) whipping of convicted criminals, including women. If that is not torture, then what is?

Corporal punishment is shunned by “modern democracies”. How come this “democracy” is rewarded for such an archaic practice?

Even women in Botswana are still whipped; hence the Setswana saying that "Ya mosimane ke e nkgwe", meaning that corporal punishment was traditionally for males only.

Democracy in Africa

The future of democracy in Africa is threatened not by Africa’s inability to develop functional social and political systems.

It is not even threatened by the intransigence of the current crop of leadership, per se.

It is threatened by non-African business interests – big business interests – that are responsible for the movement of our peoples from their lands; and for the manipulation of our socio-political and economic systems to make way for their interests – the creation of new markets for their mass produced commodities from the West and for the exploitation of our vast resources.

The plight of all indigenous peoples can be traced back to some big business interests – a strange coincidence.

Current “targeted sanctions” against Zimbabwe are aimed at businessmen with huge interests in big business and mining and mining related companies. This is not a coincidence.

New additions to the U.S. sanctions list are mining magnates: John Bredenkamp (who the U.S. said was involved in arms trading and diamond extraction), Muller Conrad "Billy" Rautenbach (who it said was linked with mining projects that "enriched the government")

Companies designated by the Bush administration do not include Anglo-American – which is heavily involved in mining deals in the country. Surely AA should also be “propping up the regime”. This exclusion is also not a coincidence.

Unless our democracies become true democracies, for Africa, we can never extricate ourselves from the very troubling web created by big business interests.

The reality of the moment is that big business and Western governments are so intertwined that the difference is now almost non-existent.

At least for now, we hope, Botswana will not be used as a launch pad for the recolonization of Africa by big business. Paying huge monetary prizes to presidents – who are elected by the people – defeats the whole purpose of “governing for the people, by the people”. Presidents will become Chief Executive Officers who “govern for business” and ignore the plight of their people, especially those indigenous people who have an inalienable right to their lands.

info@talkzimbabwe.com