Vincent Munié looks at France's strategies and machinations in the Central African Republic.

Buried deep in the mixed-bag of the November 19 2007 presidential agenda, a meeting took place between Nicolas Sarkozy and Francois Bozizé of the Central African Republic (CAR). The secrecy and brevity of the encounter (27 minutes) belies a certain degree of discomfort. In fact, CAR is by no means an insignificant country to France.

CAR attained independence in 1960 from its former colonial master after decades of exploitation, but this did not diminish France’s political and military influence. Why then, was this meeting so quietly and hurriedly held? It appears that a chasm has opened between France and CAR.

At the beginning of 2007, relations between the two countries seemed normal. In the spring, Birao, the capital city of the Vakaga region which lies in the far north-east on the border with Chad and Sudan’s Darfur, briefly hit the headlines. In the same period, France was in the midst of an electoral campaign period, and consequently, there was little media focus on what role the French military was playing in this strategic region. And yet, on the 4th of March, in the first such campaign since Kolwezi in 1978, the French carried out an aerial assault on Birao, which had been under attack from the rebel Union of Democratic Forces for Unity (UDFU).

This new rebel force was formed in September of 2006 and brought together three armed groups composed of disillusioned ex-comrades of Bozizé, former officers who had served under ex-president Ange-Felix Patassé, and soldiers disgruntled with their pay. The Central African rebellion is a heterogeneous one; The movements oscillate between a Pro-Patassé political stance and a criminal tendency. However in order to understand the attack of 4 March, 2007, one must track back to November 2006, when a force of 50-odd men first seized control of Birao and several other areas of the North-East (Sam Oandja, Ouanda Djalle, etc.).

It took a month for the Central African army, supported by Bangui-based French troops and F1 Mirage fighter jets from N’Djamena to repulse the rebels toward Chad and Sudan. The tension was palpable. This is despite the fact that in February of the same year, a peace accord was signed in Sirte, Libya, between President Bozizé and Abdoulaye Miskine, on behalf of the UDFU. On the ground the rebels under the new leadership of Damane Zacharia dismissed the accord.

SOLDIERS RUNNING AMOK

At the beginning of March, Daman Zacharia announced a second assault on Birao. He declared that he was taking on the French, for what he saw as their interference in national matters. Since November 2006, France had maintained a small Special Force detachment of 128 in Birao. On the night of 3rd March, this force came under heavy artillery fire.

Two Mirage F1 fighter jets dispatched from Chad quickly destroyed the artillery nests. The following night, 50 troops from the 3rd Marine Infantry Parachute Regiment were dispatched form Bangui to a small airstrip 12 km from Birao to setup a launch-point for Transall and Hercules carriers bringing in troops from Central Africa and about one hundred French legionnaires. The Central African Army, with the manpower and logistical support from the French, were thus able to regain control of the town and its surrounds.

Zacharia and his forces were headed for Bangui, and were it not for Paris, the government of Bozizé would have fallen. The Central African conflicts are seen as wars of the poor. The UDFU has never had more than 500 combatants, while the national army has 5000 men, of which the fighting force is less than 2000. For a country size of France, this is very small.

After the March conflagration, Birao was left in ruins: 70% of houses were burnt and looted. There were very few civilian casualties given that all the town’s inhabitants had sought refuge in the bush. However, the destruction of the millet reserves, just before the onset of the rainy season, portends a certain famine for an impoverished population that is totally dependent on its meager agriculture production.

Although all parties deny responsibility, its seems that the national army bears a huge culpability for the pillage. In this forgotten part of a forgotten country the military once again has the dubious distinction of turning on its own citizens. The soldiers in Central Africa seem to be out of control. The terror metered out by the army in the North West is a major cause of the insecurity in the area. Of particular concern is the presence of the ubiquitous dreaded presidential guard – drawn from “ex-freedom fighters who were brought in from Chad to bolster Bozizé’s coup in 2003.

There have been massacres, rape, torture and looting… all perpetrated under the guise of fighting the rebel group Armée Populaire pour la Restauration de la République et de la démocratie (APRD), the country’s second rebellion. The presidential guard has launched several attacks on the civilian population. The national army (formed by France) is responsible for the massive displacement of citizens (200,000 displaced in the North-West).

Clearly, France would not gain from attention on its involvement in CAR. However, the national army has become a dubious ally. There were several calls from the French Foreign Ministry over the summer, urging the CAR government to rebuild confidence between the army and the citizenry. At the beginning of November 2007, Bozizé himself acknowledged the atrocities and took symbolic measures. He invited the rebel groups to the negotiating table. Their demands, put forward primarily by the Central African People’s Liberation Movement (MLPC) of former Prime Minister Martin Ziguélé, revolve around the disputed 2005 elections, army atrocities and the mismanagement of economic reforms.

France still does not seem ready to cut its ex-colony loose. Under a 1960 defence accord, France is obligated to intervene in the event of foreign aggression. The current rebellion is, however, of local origin – and not orchestrated by Khartoum, as has been suggested in official circles. France’s presence in the region has taken on an “unquestionable” character. The March military operation is but a symptom of a much bigger problem.

MUTINIES AND SHENANIGANS

After a brutal colonization of the Oubangi-Chari, the first “French” town, Bangui, was established in 1889. Independence did not end French patronage, making CAR a textbook example of what is referred to as “Franco-Africa”. After the “fortuitous” death of the republic’s founder Barthélémy Boganda, France has always systematically maintained a firm grip on power by propping up and deposing its protégés; David Dacko was twice installed and deposed, Jean-Bedel Bokassa proclaimed himself emperor and was overthrown by France in Operation Barracuda, André Kolingba set up a military regime, Felix Patassé was the first “democratically-elected” president, and the latest in line is Bozizé.

In a review of the cooperation, the two permanent bases of Bouar and Bangui were closed in 1998, following the “mutinies” of 1996 during which French soldiers seized control of the capital. In 2002 an operations centre consisting in part of the Special Operations Command (COS), was set up through Operation Boali… Another sign of France’s continued influence is the presence of General Henri-Alain Guillou as presidential military advisor, along with about 60 other officials in various ministries.

Whereas CAR has been relatively untouched by the systematic industrial depredation suffered by its neighbours, its central position on the continent fits in with France’s political and economic strategy. In the course of the last fifty years, CAR has secretly become a feeding-trough. The sustained lawlessness has favoured the wanton extraction of minerals, precious stones and illegal ivory trade. The 1979 diamond affair is just a tip of the massive iceberg that is the exploitation and expatriation of gold and diamonds by French businessmen. The same has been true for the rapacious exploitation of timber and rubber resources through concessions given to individuals engaged in tropical misadventures. The Kolingba (1982-1993) and Patassé (1993-2003) regimes have followed on in the same style.

France has more or less maintained some military presence in CAR since independence, and at the same time exercises the same political patronage as in the rest of the sub-region. An important part of this presence is France’s ability to monitor the neighbouring countries. In addition, France has always favoured Africa as a military training ground. So far, France has been able to prevail militarily, given that none have taken on a terrorist character as has happened in the Middle East. The hand of France has also been clearly seen in African politics, as was the case in Rwanda and Côte d’Ivoire.

The French media also has a significant part to play: on 14 July 2007, France 2 carried a rare report on CAR that glorified the role of French troops in the Birao rebellion, without addressing the question as to why France was there in the first place, the root causes of the rebellion, the state of the country, or even the atrocities committed by the CAR army.

It is true that the CAR crises do not constitute an all-out war or a humanitarian crisis of the kind that stirs up international attention or emotions. At the same time the country continues to suffer silently in grinding poverty. The Human Development Index list CAR as the 5th –poorest country. The state is practically non-existent outside the capital, hardly giving any assistance to a population left to its devices. In January 2008, civil servants went on strike to demand salary arrears. On 18 January, the prime minister resigned. Since 1960 the country has been yoked with leaders chosen more for their obsequiousness than their managerial acumen. As a result the CAR has been impoverished, hence justifying the need for “aid” – military, economic and political.

Bozizé did however deign to take liberties against his colonial master and protector. In April 2007, the government suddenly decided to nationalize the petroleum sector, in the process excluding Total, which until that point had been the major shareholder in SOGAL, the hydrocarbon management company. Further still, the president’s nephew Sylvain, Ndoutingaye, minister for mines, was given the economy portfolio, against the advice of Sarkozy and the World Bank. Strict financial conditions were also imposed on Areva’s exploitation of the Bakouma mine. Areva had recently acquired Uramin, the Canadian company that held uranium-mining concessions in CAR. The final act of defiance was Bozizé’s visit to Omar El-Bashir, his Sudanese counterpart, despite France’s disapproval.

At the same time France has been accused of ties to a “rogue regime” thanks to its links with the national army. Despite efforts at transparency, the national army remains largely unaccountable, given that officers accused of crimes are simply dismissed without charges. The heralded national dialogue remains an illusory promise. Although diplomatic pressure has been brought to bear, France withdrawing its troops would be the key factor. Only a couple of military advisers were withdrawn this summer. South African diplomats however continue to work in the corridors of power. A peace accord was signed in March when Thabo Mbeki quietly visited Bangui. As a result of this visit, the presidential guard was placed under the tutelage of thirty South African military instructors. At the end of the day, the stakes are rising in the race to take over patronage of CAR.

The CAR revolt is not an isolated case. Chad’s Idriss Déby showed an independent streak in the Zoe’s Arch saga. Niger’s president Mamadou Tandja has been actively seeking out other economic partners. In this context, France’s traditional bilateral ties, the military cooperation and economic networks seem to be on the wane. France has subsequently insisted on the deployment of a European Union force (EUFOR), which will effectively double the number of French troops on the ground in the strategic Chad/CAR area. Their mandate remains unclear as far as Mission “Epervier” or Operation Boali are concerned, raising the likelihood of confusion.

In 2007, however, a mere military presence is not enough to guarantee France’s pre-eminence in the country. As her paratroopers and soldiers descend upon the capital and patrol its streets, they walk past the ruins of the Sports stadium, where Bokassa was enthroned. This gift from the Giscard-d’Estaing regime, continues to crumble and decay by the day, while a mere forty metres away rises the city’s grandest structure: a beautiful thirty-nine thousand-seater stadium. A gift from China.

*Vincent Munie is the director of Survie-France.

*This article appeared in the French edition of Pambazuka News and was translated by Josh Ogada.

*Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

Libya is getting the backing of Ukraine to build nuclear reactors. Mustafa Adam-Noble looks at the implications of an oil-rich country going nuclear and the possible impact on Libyan people.

A honeymoon is rapidly emerging between Libya and the Ukraine.

Viktor Yushchenko, the Ukrainian President, has declared his intention to help Libya develop its use of “peaceful” nuclear energy. According to Afrique En Ligne, an online African magazine, bilateral economic projects have been emphasised by Yushschenko. They include the granting of a Libyan contract to a Ukrainian oil and gas company in return for the use of Ukrainian agricultural land by Libya. The Ukraine has also offered to build roads and railways in the North African country and has recently supplied Libya with an Antonov AN-124-100, the world’s largest cargo plane.

Such a large scale of political and economic bartering and investment is bound to raise a few eyebrows.

On the one hand, the rush for oil by the Ukrainians makes sense: Moscow’s threat of turning off Russian-Ukranian pipelines is ever-present. Libya’s need for cheaper food amid rising food prices is a very real concern, and Gaddafi can’t seem to fix agriculture domestically. However, this eager international relationship is murky and far from straightforward.

Libya is awash with corruption amongst its officials and desperation within its population. Decades of crippling policies by Gaddafi, and subsequent trade sanctions, have left the country in tatters.

Libya was an active sponsor of terrorism until only recently when, in 2003, Gaddafi admitted to bombing a Pan American flight over Lockerbie in 1998, killing 270 people. The dictator also admitted to bombing the French UTA airliner over Niger in 1989 that killed all 170 civilians on board.

The declaration of his guilt prompted the immediate lifting of UN sanctions imposed on Libya in 1992; Libya promised compensation for the victim’s relatives ($2.7 billion in instalments for those on the Lockerbie flight) and everyone ran to Libya with open arms, embracing the now reformed rogue state.

Congratulating Libya by supplying it with nuclear technology and a gigantic cargo plane hardly seems wise.

The argument for nuclear energy in Libya may not seem to make economic sense. Its population is only 5 million, but it has the largest oil reserves in Africa. However, Alan McDonald, an official with the International Atomic Energy Agency, explains that nuclear energy could be a strategic economic move for oil-rich countries. He said, “they know their oil will only become more valuable as global demand increases […] It may be more cost-effective to sell oil to Americans driving SUVs than to burn it domestically.”

It is likely that Libya has an additional, political motive for developing nuclear technology.

Iran’s uranium enrichment programme has forced the region into nuclear proliferation (recently Kuwait, Jordan and Bahrain have also begun planning nuclear plants). According to the Washington Post, 40 developing countries have recently signalled plans to develop nuclear power, which can then lead to the completion of nuclear arsenals.

Algeria and Morocco are also planning the construction of nuclear reactors. This would paint a very different picture to the current nuclear African map, with only two reactors on the whole continent (both in South Africa).

According to Igor Kriponov, writing for Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, “South Africa accounts for 60 percent of all of Africa's energy production. (Africa as a whole generates only 3.1 percent of the world's electricity)”.

Using nuclear energy could help increase both Libya’s and Africa’s electricity generation without immediately polluting the environment. What you do with containers of nuclear waste is another question.

Easing fears of a world armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, Mohammed ElBaradei, director general of the IAEA, is quoted as saying in the Washington Post, “You don't really even need to have a nuclear weapon. It's enough to buy yourself an insurance policy by developing the capability, and then sit on it. Let's not kid ourselves: Ninety percent of it is insurance, a deterrence.”

Libya’s nuclear programme could thus satisfy both an economic and a political agenda. However, the possibility of an unstable tyrant like Gaddafi attaining nuclear weapons poses a serious threat. Additionally, the Ukraine’s dealings with Libya are unlikely to benefit the general Libyan economy.

Senior British businessmen now working in Libya warn that the agreements with the Ukraine are convoluted and are not based in direct foreign investment procedures. The bartered nature of the agreements decreases transparency and creates a scenario loaded with the potential for theft. Additionally, because there is now so much more money coming into a newly open Libya, corruption is getting worse. The country cannot cope well enough to bear the fruits of investment. There are no institutions or protocol, no free press, very few educated Libyans and an unreliable communications system.

Although Gaddafi has begun to allow the creation of financial institutions, with economic reform gradually building in the banking sector, development in other areas of the economy is simply not happening. Perhaps we must be patient as there are still some positive signs that internal change is possible.

In an address to Libya’s General People’s Committee, Gaddafi stated that the nationalised Libyan economy has been inefficient and wasteful of money. He emphatically said, “The traditional state is over”.

Not so fast.

It would be tempting to think that the bad times of a state-run, isolated Libya have come to an end. While Libya catches up, continued malpractice, corruption and poverty will have long term effects that would be difficult to reverse even if all sectors are eventually reformed and regulated.

Gilbert Achcar, Professor of Development Studies and International Relations at SOAS University in London, argues that the oil deal with the Ukraine suits the Libyans because it offers them better conditions than an agreement with, say, France or Italy. This may be true, but the benefit of working with the Ukrainians in the four very different fields of nuclear technology, oil, roads and railways must be questioned.

One senior businessman likened the Ukraine’s multi-project approach in Libya to an accountant that can provide further services as a lawyer, a writer and an acrobat. It is unlikely that each role can be done sufficiently well by one party.

These deals manifest a special relationship between Libya and the Ukraine based not on economic efficiency and competition but on favouritism.

Pitfalls also arise in the Libyan economy.

According to Eman Wahby in an article published in 2005 by the Carnegie Endowment to International Peace, “[Libya] is the top recipient of foreign investment in Africa.” But unemployment in 2008 is estimated at 30%, and has in fact increased from 25% in 2005.

This shows that the Libyan system does not benefit the masses and, coupled with Libya’s significant growth rate of 9% in 2008, demonstrates that wealth goes only to the few and the powerful.

Wahby mentions that the country had announced plans “to cut $5 billion worth of subsidies”. She adds: “For decades, the state has been subsidizing 93 percent of the value of basic commodities, notably fuel.”

It seems that Libya’s sprint towards reform will leave it out of breath as prices increase, squeezing the population beyond its means. Wahby explains that subsidy cuts in May 2005 increased fuel prices by 30 % and electricity prices by 100%, leading to price rises in other goods and services.

This is simply not sustainable.

In order to be successful, Libya’s development must be gradual, assessed and measured using foresight and rationality - characteristics Gaddafi has consistently lacked throughout his 39 years in power.

It is doubtful that the Libya-Ukraine relationship will be profitable for the Libyan population. Given Libya’s severe economic difficulties as a consequence of a totalitarian system, each decision Gaddafi makes must ultimately be questioned.

Even if Gaddafi does spend his country’s wealth on the things it most needs, it is unlikely that he will be able to improve the lives of the Libyan people.

*Mustafa Adam-Noble is a political commentator.

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

With governance in limbo and post-election violence spreading beyond control in Zimbabwe, rights groups and think-tanks have warned of a military coup, martial law or even civil war. Hope that a run-off after disputed presidential elections will bring reconciliation is fading, and calls for urgent pan-African intervention are increasing.

In a move which could potentially plunge Guinea into political and social turmoil, President Lansana Conté sacked his internationally-backed prime minister Lansana Kouyaté on 20 May, replacing him with long-time ally Ahmed Tidjane Souaré. The change over was ordered by presidential decree and announced on the state-run television’s evening news.

The new African Union (AU) commissioner for science and technology has put education firmly at the top of his agenda. Jean-Pierre Onvéhoun Ezin, a mathematics researcher at Benin's National University, took office last month (29 April).

How committed are world’s richest countries to the development of Africa, the world’s poorest continent? While rich countries are most often compared on the basis of foreign aid as a percentage of their GDP, finding the real answer involves so much more. Using the same methods as in the global Commitment to Development Index (CDI), this paper ranks the world’s 21 richest countries in a new CDI for Africa based not only on their foreign aid, but on their trade, investment, and migration policies as well as their commitments to the environment, to security, and to technology.

Although progress has been made on Debt since the issue was pushed to the top of the G8 agenda in 1998 ($88bn of debt has been cancelled) this paper from the Jubilee Campaign asserts that far more needs to be done in order to effectively tackle global poverty.

State agents in Murehwa town abducted the MDC candidate for ward 6 on Thursday morning, as they continued to terrorise Murehwa district. A party supporter who was with him said Shepherd Jani was beaten severely by 4 men as they dragged him into a blue twin cab, registration number AAA 9248. Our contact said the vehicle was familiar and he believes it is the same car that was used in the abduction of Langton Mafuse, the MDC candidate for ward 10 Murehwa North, who was taken from his home last week and has still not been located.

A heavily pregnant woman who was three months away from giving birth was bludgeoned to death in a ‘horrific, brutal and frenzied attack’ that left her almost unrecognisable. Rosemary Maramba’s body was found in Nhakiwa village in Mutawatawa in Mashonaland central. Maramba is one of three people linked to the MDC, who were murdered in the area over the weekend.

Onyekachi Wambu looks at post-liberation South Africa and the contradictions of promise and reality and duly warns that the ANC government might very well be condemning South Africa to repeat Zimbabwe's mistakes.

This story has been brewing since the mid-1990s, and, as usual, we have ignored it our peril.

Despite all the 'Rainbow' dreams, everytime I have visited SA since 1992 I have been more & more worried about the real fundamentals - a very poor, and increasingly angry people, amidst great wealth which is not distributed equitably. African people are very patient but it usually takes about 10 -15 years after independence (see Zimbabwe) for people to realise that they can't eat 'freedom', and for real politics to kick in.

The economic facts in SA are this - the deal that buried apartheid in 1994, contained no redistribution of economic power. Black empowerment would only come if the economy expanded and through some mild forms of positive discrimination (BEE). Affirmative action (see what it has done for white women in the US) only really benefits a small minority of middleclass, educated, or (politically) connected Africans, just as it has done in SA. So it meant, that for the vast majority to benefit - the economy needed to expand more than 5%. At 5% it would just about absorb those coming onto the job market, not soaking up the historic apartheid unemployed.

Now watch what happened in the real world. Between 1994 - 2004 growth averaged around 3%. In 2004 it reached 4%. By 2005 (eleven years after apartheid ended) it finally reached 5% and only went beyond that in 2006 and 2007. Even then the last 3 year growth has not been pro-poor growth, but has benefited the already rich, selling commodities, etc.

Nevertheless the SA government by 2005, alongside its enormous house building, water and electrification programmes, was finally in a postition to deal with its historic unemployed and those coming onto the job market

Only it wasn't. Because at the same time over the last 13 years, 5 million new migrants had come into the country (3 million from Zimbabwe alone), many of them better educated and working for less money than native South Africans. So even the growth of the last 3 years has not really made an impact on those native unemployement figures and the anger has continued simmering.

This anger has been expressed all along since 1994 as a crime problem - I always feared what would happen eventually when a 'demagogue' would exploit it and make it 'political'. I thought when this happened, the emergent 'political' campaign to gain traction would target the whites -as in Zimbabwe. But I guess SA is different. People there can see the economic disaster in Zim, when international capital and white expertise fled, and do not want a repetition (although for how long?).

Most voters are still reluctant to punish the ANC government (which has given many a pension, houses, water, electricity) for this state of affairs. This reluctance is reinforced by the fact that there is not a viable opposition (the main ones being all nationalist/ethinic minority parties DA,Inkatha, PAC, etc).

So the mob scape-goat and attack foreigners.

Perhaps as William Gumede suggests elsewhere, it might be time for the ANC to break up and for a wing of it to become a workers party -championing the poor and another wing to represent the interests of the middle-class. Politics would then be about finding a balance that satisfies all and could then be done peacfully through votes and street protests, not through violence and killing, as in so much of Africa.

This might even be the best option, given the reluctance of Southern African liberation movements to concede legitimacy to other forces that did not 'win' the liberation war and establish the new post liberation state. Different traditions within the ANC would thus represent the different emerging interests following the national liberation phase.

The ANC need only to look over the horizon to Zimbabwe, to see a liberation party that still seeks to manage within itself, the tensions and contradictions within the nation. Having failed to do this and people went elsewhere to establish another possibility, ZANU-PF, wanting to continue monopolising power, decided not to recognise that alternative, deepening the original crisis even further.

Presideent Mbeki, having failed to heed the real meaning of the Zimbabwe crisis (how to transit from liberation to ordinary politics), might be doomed to repeat Zimbabwe. And the catalyst for the unravelling crisis in SA might be those self same Zimbabwe migrants who have fled because they cannot find a space to engage in peaceful politics back home.

*Onyekachi Wambu's lastest publication is 'Under the tree of talking - leadership for change in Africa' (2007, British Council). This article first appeared in the Africa Without Borders Forum.

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/372/48212burn.jpgThe mythologies we have constructed around us are imploding, write Mukoma Wa Ngugi and Firoze Manji looking at the background to the explosion of xenophobia in South Africa. The situation is the culmination of policies that have made the rich richer, and the poor poorer. But "the ruling elite is not South Africa. There are many within South Africa who are in solidarity with those under attack, and are opposed to the conditions that feed xenophobia."

The mythologies we have constructed around us are imploding. There is no point in running away from this. The edifices we have of Truth and Reconciliation, post-apartheid healing, rainbow nations and multi-party post-dictatorship democracies are coming down all around us.

What is more, the edifices are crushing down into a sea of ruin. Kenya, Zimbabwe, Somalia, and now South Africa are burning alongside bigger fires in Darfur and the Congo. And where a fragile peace now reigns in countries like Liberia and Sierra Leone, the poverty is so extreme that unless tackled decisively, the slide back into civil war will continue to loom threateningly in the background.

But South Africa especially represents a collective tragedy because, and perhaps naively, it has represented our collective hope for Africa. This land where, as of today, at least 42 Africans from other countries have been killed and thousands are fleeing, businesses destroyed and homes burnt, where the army is being deployed in the poor townships just like the days of apartheid, this is the land that produced Steve Biko, Chris Hani, Ruth First and others.

This is the land that produced a militant and revolutionary Mandela, a Mandela so sure of the righteousness of his struggle that at his treason trial, he described the ideal of a South Africa where “all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities”, and as one that he was prepared to die for. That was in 1964. In 1990, when he was released from prison, and with apartheid broken, the promise of his struggle became a possibility. And the new South Africa became our collective hope. We clung to that hope all the more because in the same year as South Africa held its first democratic election – 1994 - was also the year in which we witnessed the genocidal slaughter of nearly a million people in the space of a few months in Rwanda. Hope and tragedy – these are elements that hover concurrently in our collective consciousness across the continent. In the rest of Africa, we have lived with those contending emotions, but somehow South Africans believed themselves immune.

But history is not without irony for in that same statement that he submitted at the beginning of his prison trial, Mandela said:

“The whites enjoy what may well be the highest standard of living in the world, whilst Africans live in poverty and misery. Forty per cent of the Africans live in hopelessly overcrowded and, in some cases, drought-stricken Reserves, where soil erosion and the overworking of the soil makes it impossible for them to live properly off the land.

"Thirty per cent," he continued, "are laborers, labor tenants, and squatters on white farms and work and live under conditions similar to those of the serfs of the Middle Ages. The other 30 per cent live in towns where they have developed economic and social habits which bring them closer in many respects to white standards. Yet most Africans, even in this group, are impoverished by low incomes and high cost of living.”

That was the Mandela of 1964, but he might as well have been speaking about the South Africa he helped create. For the Mandela of the 1990’s was followed by Mbeki who answered the challenge of this vast economic and social inequality by throwing at it the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy followed by the Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) plan. These social and economic policies have enriched a minority, and impoverished the many. The poor have remained poor, but part of the class that Mandela in 1964 identified as developing “economic and social habits which bring them closer in many respects to white standards” have been the only ones who benefited, and grown rich, from BEE.

That the ANC struggle would not have succeeded without sacrifices from fellow Africans is well known. As is the fact that the South African economy from the days of apartheid has been kept afloat by migrant labor. So how did we reach this point where xenophobia has turned violent? As in any situation – keep an eye on who benefits.

A government with policies that reward the haves - those who during apartheid already had something - and punishes those who had nothing to start with, has a good reason to find xenophobia useful. What racism did for apartheid, xenophobia serves for the new ruling class – its unjust policies, its failures, its betrayal of poor South Africans, are all blamed on the amakwekwere.

What should we expect? We now know that the even in exile, some ANC members were more equal than others. The elite of the ANC today was the elite in exile. Blind to the poor of Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Mozambique or Angola when in exile, how can we expect them to see them today from the high offices of government? And if blind to the cries and struggles of poor South Africans, surely the poor immigrant is invisible.

The Mbeki government has for the short term deployed the army to assist the police. The government will do what all other governments do – criminalize: it will criminalize the youth in the slums in the same way that the Kenyan, Zimbabwean and Nigerian governments have, in the same way the American government has criminalized African American youth in the ghettoes. The structural inequalities will remain, individual youths will be thrown in jail as criminals.

But let us remember this: the ruling elite is not South Africa. There are many within South Africa who are in solidarity with those under attack, and are opposed to the conditions that feed xenophobia, opposed to the policies that attack the poor and reward the rich. There are many who understand, as did Steve Biko, that because of the vicious inequalities in South Africa, justice cannot come without redistribution of land and wealth.

Anticipating the violence,, PASSOP (People Against Suffering Suppression Oppression and Poverty) together with COSATU and other organizations marched against xenophobia on the 17th of May. Announcing the , PASSOP said that it is “appalled by the reports of recent xenophobic attacks in Alexandria and Diepsloot. We are appealing to all political parties and social movements within South Africa to address and clarify their stances towards the important issue of xenophobia. Foreigners in townships across South Africa live in fear, much like the Jews during the Nazi Regime. Their homes are vandalized, their stores looted and even their lives are taken. This inhumanity cannot be allowed to continue.”

The Social Movements Indaba (SMI) – “a coordinating national body of social movements, civil society and activist organizations – is organizing with its affiliated organizations and immigrant communities to roll back the groundswell of xenophobia” on 24th May. Recognizing the “origins lie within the conditions of poverty in which the majority of south Africans live” and that the struggle is “for a change to the neo-liberal capitalist system that has created this reality” SMI maintains that a “rearguard struggles for safety and security of immigrants in the country must continue.”

Abahlali baseMjondolo, (Shack Dwellers) Movement says it is time for us to ask seriously the question “why it is that money and rich people can move freely around the world while everywhere the poor must confront razor wire, corrupt and violent police, queues and relocation or deportation.” Abahlali baseMjondolo which began in Durban, South Africa is the largest organisation of the militant poor in post-apartheid South Africa that includes tens of thousands of people from more than 30 settlements. It is this organization that says “A human being cannot be illegal!”

In this issue of Pambazuka News, we carry some of the courageous reports that have arisen for those who ally themselves with the oppressed. Below is a partial list of articles on xenophobia carried Pambazuka News in the recent past. They illustrate that xenophobia is not new to South Africa. But it had to blow eventually.

* Owen Sichone (2008-02-07)

* Koni Benson (2007-08-30)

* 2006-09-14

* Further articles on racism and xenophobia

*Mukoma Wa Ngugi and Firoze Manji are co-editors of Pambazuka News.

*Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

A lot has been said in the media about the ongoing violent attacks on foreigners, described as ‘Xenophobia.’ However, in accordance with the elitist method of news making, adopted by almost all mainstream media outlets, which puts too much emphasis on ‘expert’ opinion, mainly petty bourgeois analysts and commentators have been invited on major talk shows to analyse the situation and suggest solutions. Of course, their views, while very narrow and shallow, vary vastly.

Some Pan Africanist ‘Azanians’ feel that ‘black consciousnesses’ could be the solution. Blacks are killing each other because of a colonial mentality, the argument goes. Many others have linked the attacks to the country’s socio-economic conditions. Typically, the analysis on the root cause of the country’s scandalous poverty fails to bring in the necessary structural element. Others, including the DA, have blamed it on, amongst others, our immigration policies and failure to ‘protect our borders.’

While all this discussion is going on, we are losing out on a wonderful opportunity to get to the bottom of the issue. Mainly, because, the people at the centre of all the violence, both the foreigners and the ‘xenophobic’ South Africans, are not part of the debate.

And, in true denialist South African style, the government has absolved itself from any responsibility and has vehemently condemned claims that this is as a result of frustration linked to poor service delivery.

Instead, going as far as attributing the chaos to a ‘third force’ and the IFP, they have vowed to bring to book the ‘hooligans’ and the ‘thugs’ that are behind the atrocious attacks. In the midst of this, as part of the ongoing struggle for power between Luthuli House and the Union Buildings, the new populist ANC leadership has contradicted the government and has linked the attacks to government’s ‘failures.’

The politicians, pundits and everyone else has spoken. But, strangely, the people at the centre of the dispute have not. None of the radio or television talk show hosts which have been discussing the matter for more than a week now have bothered getting the opinion of the people at the centre of the dispute. In newspaper columns, the usual columnists have written page long philosophical, sometimes abstract, analysis of the problem.

In Alexander for example, to get to the bottom of the problem, should the media not be attempting to secure the views and opinions of people who attended, or organised the meeting that decided foreigners should be driven out of the impoverished township? And, surely, in all the other areas where the violence has spread, there are ‘ringleaders.’ Should these people not be the ones at the centre of media discussion around the issue? Why are they attacking foreigners? Should we not be striving to hear it directly from the ‘horse’s mouth’? Has anyone in the press even attempted to locate the perpetrators?

Clearly, if we are to resolve many of the widespread socio-economic problems of the ‘new’ South Africa, there must be a departure from the current method of news gathering. For far too long, we have been listening to ‘intellectuals’ and to fat cat turkey necked cabinet ministers, very out of touch with reality, in their chauffer driven vehicles and designer outfits. And, given that many of the problems have remained and even worsened, most of their talk has proved nothing but ‘cheap’ and populist.

Is it not about time we listened to the people at the centre of the news whose desperate pleas to the government, in the last fourteen years, have fallen on deaf ears? Or are we too afraid what they might say may be too ‘politically incorrect’ and ‘counter revolutionary?”

The Electoral Commission (EC) has outlined the qualification for both presidential and parliamentary candidates for Elections 2008, stressing workers of government offices and chiefs were barred by law from contesting while in office.

Japan will play host next week to more heads of state than at any time since the funeral of Emperor Hirohito in 1989. Leaders and ministers from 45 African nations will descend on Yokohama for the Fourth Tokyo International Conference on African Development - "Ticad IV" in the ugly jargon of international diplomacy.

Southern African film makers implore Southern Africa "governments, politicians and citizens to rise and send an unequivocal message to South Africa condemning these acts of violence."

We join the families who have fallen victims of this violence and offer our compassionate thoughts. Notwithstanding, we also implore our own governments, politicians and citizens to rise and send an unequivocal message to South Africa condemning these acts of violence and dissipating of innocent lives due to internal problems in South Africa.

In the last few days South African and indeed African News has been littered by deplorable acts of inhuman violence targeting many immigrants, particularly from Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Malawi. The images emanating from the streets of Johannesburg and some outlying areas are horrendous and send a lot of chills for a country that is highly acclaimed for democratic practice in the sub-region. This is a very unfortunate development and is reminiscent of the very Apartheid era that the countries and nations' of the world deplored not long ago.

For South Africa, this single act among many should be a re-awakening that things are not in the right perspective. For the poor, and sometimes desperate immigrants who have now fallen victims of violence from their once 'brothers' and 'sisters' in South Africa. Zimbabweans, and in particular, those that have sought refuge in many parts of South Africa have not done so by choice. They are victims of circumstances. They have had to live their homeland due to among other reasons, the degenerating economic and political situation in that country.

As an institution based in Zambia - a country and people, which shared the desires and supported the liberation struggles in Southern Africa - including that of both Zimbabwe and South Africa among others - it is dismaying to see such kind of anger and frustrations being directed to each other. Indeed, the circumstance leading to this are many but if we go by the kind of rationale for perpetuating this violence, the South African leadership especially the political leadership (both President Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma) should play a central role in reminding South Africa itself on the neccessity to respect and tolerate the very people who kept them in their own countries in a quest to dismantle the apartheid regime. It is their moral and legal right to be at the fore-front of persuading and encourgaging tolerance in the new South Africa. Suffice to say that this is a very unfortunate development that needs to be addressed.

We join the families who have fallen victims of this violence and offer our compassionate thoughts. Notwithstanding, we also implore our own governments, politicians and citizens to rise and send an unequivocal message to South Africa condemning these acts of violence and dissipating of innocent lives due to internal problems in South Africa. The older generation of South Africa, need to rise to the occassion and stop this violence being perpetuated by the youths. In a similar vein, let us also try to address the circumstances leading to immigrants running away from their countries. We cannot allow Zimbabwe to channell over 5 million people away from their homes seeking livelihoods in neighbouring countries when only less than thirty years ago they were triumphantically taking black leadership and power away from the Ian Smith regime.

*Abdon Yezi is a Senior Partner at the Yezi-Arts Promotions and Productions and Board Chairperson of the Southern Africa Communication for Development.

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

Supporters of the ruling ZANU-PF party in Zimbabwe tortured more than 70 people, including six men to death, in a “re-education” meeting on May 5, 2008 in Mashonaland Central, Human Rights Watch said today. The government’s campaign of organized terror and violence against the political opposition is continuing despite agreement to hold a presidential runoff election.

In the midst of the drama of the past few days, which has seen South Africans rampaging against foreigners to vent their frustrations at the slow pace of delivery of land, housing and jobs, one story stands out as the antithesis to the story of non-development.

Commemorating Malcolm X's Birthday, appraise existing African American leadership and call for a Black united front that can shake the foundation of a border-less neoliberal globalization.

"Power never takes a back step--only in the face of more power."

"Dr. King wants the same thing I want--Freedom." --Malcolm X

On what would have been Malcolm's eighty-third birthday, it is appropriate that we speak to the urgency for unity and the critical need for a functional national Black united front. Malcolm argued for unity across religious, class and ideological lines on the basis of nationality. Our movement has attempted to implement organizational expressions of his call for unity. Such vehicles like the Congress of African People (CAP), the National Black Assembly (NBA) with its Black Agenda, the African Liberation Support Committee (ALSC), and the Black Radical Congress (BRC) with its Freedom Agenda have all met with varying degrees of success but with little sustainability. We have to turn the corner on building united front organizations to those that are actually sustainable--the conditions of our people demand it.

In this period of neoliberal globalization, in which we see the gutting of social-welfare programs that due to national oppression never fully provided for the needs of Black people, our communities are faced with stagnant or declining incomes, double-digit unemployment, a crisis of home foreclosures and bankruptcies. Add to these depression-like conditions the fact that Black males are facing a criminal justice system that incarcerates them at more than eight times the rate of whites. If they are not locking our young men up, they are shooting them down in cold blood with no fear of prosecution. The Sean Bell case in New York City is just the latest case in point. Moreover, there is the federal government's criminal response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the growing attacks on our communities through gentrification, the use of our youth as cannon fodder for imperialist wars, and the criminalization of our youth. This latter phenomenon is causing our community elders to fear their own children and grandchildren. It's clear that that we need an instrument of struggle to fight back.

While some may argue that there is a vacuum of leadership in our communities, we would argue that there is leadership, but it is one that has retreated from the progressive agenda of the Civil Rights and Black Power eras. As Brother Malcolm would say, "I for one believe that if you give people a thorough understanding of what confronts them and the basic causes that produce it, they'll create their own program, and when the people create a program, you get action." Today, through corporate and government funding from the likes of groups like Wal-Mart and regional and local developers, we have organizations doing for our people rather than empowering them to do for themselves. The result is demobilization and fragmentation within the Black Liberation Movement (BLM). The national Black community's response to Katrina is indicative of this condition.

During the Civil Rights movement, it was the program and tactics of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), the left wing of that movement, which played a leading role during that period. They were not the groups that got all the press and money but they were some of the forces that set the line of march for the movement. Similarly, it was revolutionary nationalists and developing Marxists who set the direction within CAP, the National Black Political Assembly, and ALSC during the '70s.

The Achilles Heel of these young radicals was their lack of a basic united-front framework that would engage the many organizations and activists in developing programs, tactical plans and slogans to guide coalitions and campaigns. Instead, sectarian maneuvering and struggling with allies as if they were the enemy became the practice of the day, which has led to our current situation where the middle and right wings of the BLM are playing the leading roles. While we cannot ignore the role of the state in damaging these efforts, more forces having had a basic united-front approach would have allowed us to better withstand the state's penetration of our efforts.

Having correctly summed up the sectarian, undemocratic membership policies and patriarchal error of the '70s New Communist Movement, Black, Asian, Latina/o and Anglo-American leftists entered the Rainbow Coalition Presidential candidacy of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988. However, the Black Left was not playing the leading role in the Jackson Campaign. It was the National Black petit bourgeoisie that was taking the lead and fighting for a more prominent role in the Democratic Party. Despite their hard work on issue development and grassroots mobilization, some of these forces, like Jackson, were seduced by their class origin to become "power brokers" for their nationality and class in the Democratic Party. Instead of creating counter-hegemonic and popular forms of organizations, they relied exclusively on the Jackson campaign organizations for their education and mobilization of the masses. So, as Jackson sought to pull the reins on the "Rainbow Challenge" in the interests of the Democratic Party, the left forces were not able to challenge Jackson's retreat from the Rainbow program.

As the Black Left entered the '90s, the increased power of neoliberal globalization; the massacre in Tiananmen Square in China; the demise of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union; and the question raised at the anti-globalization protest in Seattle, "Where are the People of Color?" were indications of the fragmentation, the lack of a coherent approach to Black Liberation in the US and the overall weakness of the Left in the era of postmodern identity politics with its aversion to a guiding political narrative.

In the mid-'90s the Nation of Islam, under the leadership of Minister Louis Farrakhan and Minister Ben (Chavis) Muhammad, stepped into this vacuum of leadership in the BLM to propose the Million Man March. Held on October 16, 1995, the march attracted some 1.5 million men. Many speakers spoke in support of voter registration and Black self-help programs. They were also very critical of the Republican so-called Contract with America, which was seen as an attack on programs like welfare, Medicaid, housing programs and student aid programs. However, its male-only focus, religious overtones, and the Nation of Islam's top-down organizing style kept many Black leftists away or at arm's length. Two years later, fed up with unemployment, homelessness, teen pregnancy and Black-on-Black crime fueled by the crack epidemic ravaging our communities, several hundred thousand Black women gathered in Philadelphia on October 24 for the Million Woman March. Broader in composition and led by grassroots women from the East Coast, South and mid-West, this march was held without the slick marketing and big-name speakers at the Million Man March. This march was followed in 1998 by the million Youth March and the Million Worker March in 2004. However, a major weakness of these efforts was the lack of organizational development after the demonstrations, as well as declining numbers after the success of the Million Woman March.

The formation of the Black Radical Congress (BRC) in June 1998, drawing some 2000 participants, would break the cycle of "show up but no follow-up" associated with the Million More Marches. The BRC was inclusive of the various ideological trends in the BLM, e.g. socialists, communists, LGBT, feminists, and revolutionary Black nationalists. In the years following its formation, the BRC would develop over a dozen chapters and carry out local and national campaigns like Education Not Incarceration and Fightback against the War. It was also involved in issues like HIV/AIDS, police violence and in defense of the Charleston, SC dock workers (who had been charged with inciting to riot as they sought to defend their rights and living standards.)

However, in the last five years it has become increasingly clear that some of the initial leaders of the BRC were overextended and needed to pull back. It has also become clear that the infrastructure envisioned at the founding Congress could not be sustained with limited resources and a volunteer staff. So while it has seen a reduction in the number in chapters and Local Organizing Committees, the BRC has advanced a radical analysis on various topics through its listserve, leaflets and newsletters.

This June 20-22 the Black Radical Congress will hold its 10th anniversary congress at the University of Missouri at St. Louis. At this congress, the BRC will address such issues as the state of the Black Liberation Movement and what the BRC should look like as an organization in order to respond to the current crisis facing Black people. Other issues to be addressed are how one funds an effective organization with independence and sustainability as guiding principles. Lastly, the congress will deal with leadership and governance for the organization. Notwithstanding the good work of the BRC, it remains just another organization in the fragmented Black Liberation Movement and has not lived up to its initial hope and potential as a space that successfully and for a sustained period brought together diverse radical ideological currents within the Black Liberation Movement.

Although the devastation and neglect caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in the Gulf Coast provided a golden opportunity for a united approach, this has not been realized. As Malcolm would say, "Our people have made the mistake of confusing the methods with the objectives. As long as we agree on objectives, we should never fall out with each other just because we believe in different methods, or tactics, or strategy. We have to keep in mind at all times that we are not fighting for separation. We are fighting for recognition as free humans in this society." Thus, there have been struggles around issues like organizing methodology, leadership accountability, patriarchy, how to promote grassroots leadership, and the role of "base building" in the context of building the Black united front on the ground in the Gulf Coast Reconstruction efforts.

This has led some of the Black left forces associated with Katrina Solidarity work to call for a Black Left Gathering on May 30-June 1 at the Sonia Hayes Stone Center at the University of North Carolina, at Chapel Hill. This gathering will look at the current state of the BLM, the Gulf Coast Situation, and its relationship to the overall building of a national Black united front. It will also look at the issues of the war in Iraq and its impact on the delivery of basic human services to Blacks, other people of color and the general working class.

While much of the attention of the masses is focused on the Obama campaign, we salute the Black left forces who are planning to meet to strategize on how to build unity of action of the Left and radicals of the Black Nation. Both of these motions are composed of activists and revolutionaries who have grasped Malcolm's message and are correctly summing up the errors of the movements of the '60s, '70s, '80s and '90s and are in the process of trying to regroup and to rebuild a potent and effective Black Liberation Movement. In fact, Freedom Road has members working in both of these formations. We believe that these two motions need to come together in the spirit of Malcolm's call for a functional national Black united front. At the same time, we recognize that building such unity on the ground and in practice is a process rather an event. Thus, we applaud both efforts for participating in each other's events as speaker and participants.

Moreover, both gatherings will address the aftermath of Katrina and the failure to implement an adequate, democratic and rapid reconstruction. Each will examine the assaults on Black communities across the country through police murder of youth, gentrification and more. It is here that we urge that the two groups, regardless of what organizational forms they decide on for their work, combine efforts in a community-based national campaign. The "We Charge Genocide" campaign, which is up and running, presents at this moment the greatest possibility for cooperation, addresses some of the most pressing needs of our people, and can contribute in a powerful way to the rebuilding of the Black Liberation Movement.

If the Obama campaign and all that it has inspired is to have a lasting impact, it will necessitate the existence of a mass-based, viable Black Left that practices a united-front approach. If there is to be anything to build upon after the November elections, irrespective of who wins, there will need to be a strong left presence, and there will especially need to be a Black left motion that is pushing the envelope. Malcolm's orientation was toward the building of a broader and broader movement. This is as relevant today as it was in 1965. Just as relevant is the notion that if the radicals in any movement do not cohere, the forces in the middle will start to vacillate, and those on the right will gain dominance. We have seen that before, and we must not let it happen again.

*Prepared by the Nationalities Commission, Freedom Road Socialist Organization/OSCL. For more information, please visit

*Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

Abahlali baseMjondolo Statement on the Xenophobic Attacks

There is only one human race.

Our struggle and every real struggle is to put the human being at the centre of society, starting with the worst off.

An action can be illegal. A person cannot be illegal. A person is a person where ever they may find themselves.

If you live in a settlement you are from that settlement and you are a neighbour and a comrade in that settlement.

We condemn the attacks, the beatings, rape and murder, in Johannesburg on people born in other countries. We will fight left and right to ensure that this does not happen here in KwaZulu-Natal.

We have been warning for years that the anger of the poor can go in many directions. That warning, like our warnings about the rats and the fires and the lack of toilets, the human dumping grounds called relocation sites, the new concentration camps called transit camps and corrupt, cruel, violent and racist police, has gone unheeded.

Let us be clear. Neither poverty nor oppression justify one poor person turning on another. A poor man who turns on his wife or a poor family that turn on their neighbours must be opposed, stopped and brought to justice. But the reason why this happens in Alex and not Sandton is because people in Alex are suffering and scared for the future of their lives. They are living under the kind of stress that can damage a person. The perpetrators of these attacks must be held responsible but the people who have crowded the poor onto tiny bits of land, threatened their hold on that land with evictions and forced removals, treated them all like criminals, exploited them, repressed their struggles, pushed up the price of food and built too few houses, that are too small and too far away and then corruptly sold them must also be held responsible.

There are other truths that also need to be faced up to.

We need to be clear that the Department of Home Affairs does not treat refugees or migrants as human beings. Our members who were born in other countries tell us terrible stories about very long queues that lead only to more queues and then to disrespect, cruelty and corruption. They tell us terrible stories about police who demand bribes, tear up their papers, steal their money and send them to Lindela – a place that is even worse than a transit camp. A place that is not fit for a human being. We know that you can even be sent to Lindela if you were born in South Africa but you look 'too dark' to the police or you come from Giyani and so you don't know the word for elbow in isiZulu.

We need to be clear that in every relocation all the people without ID books are left homeless. This affects some people born in South Africa but it mostly affects people born in other countries.

We need to be clear that many politicians, and the police and the media, talk about 'illegal immigrants' as if they are all criminals. We know the damage that this does and the pain that this causes. We are also spoken about as if we are all criminals when in fact we suffer the most from crime because we have no gates or guards to protect our homes.

We need to be clear about the role of the South African government and South African companies in other countries. We need to be clear about NEPAD. We all know what Anglo-American is doing in the Congo and what our government is doing in Zimbabwe. They must also be held responsible.

We all know that South Africans were welcomed in Zimbabwe and in Zambia, even as far away as England, when they were fleeing the oppression of apartheid. In our own movement we have people who were in exile. We must welcome those who are fleeing oppression now. This obligation is doubled by the fact that our government and big companies here are supporting oppression in other countries.

People say that people born in other countries are selling mandrax. Oppose mandrax and its sellers but don't lie to yourself and say that people born in South African do not also sell mandrax or that our police do not take money from mandrax sellers. Fight for a police service that serves the people. Don't turn your suffering neighbours into enemies.

People say that people born in other countries are amagundane (rats, meaning scabs). Oppose amagundane but don't lie to yourself and say that people born in South Africa are not also amagundane. People also say that people born in other countries are willing to work for very little money bringing everyone's wages down. But we know that people are desperate and struggling to survive everywhere. Fight for strong unions that cover all sectors, even informal work. Don't turn your suffering neighbours into enemies.

People say that people born in other countries don't stand up to struggle and always run away from the police. Oppose cowardice but don't lie to yourself and say that people born in South Africa are not also cowards. Don't lie to yourself and pretend that it is the same for someone born here and someone not born here to stand up to the corrupt, violent and racist police. Fight for ID books for your neighbours so that we can all stand together for the rights of the poor. Don't turn your suffering neighbours into enemies.

People say that people born in other countries are getting houses by corruption. Oppose corruption but don't lie to yourself and say that people born in South Africa are not also buying houses from the councillors and officials in the housing department. Fight against corruption. Don't turn your suffering neighbours into enemies.

People say that people born in other countries are more successful in love because they don't have to send money home to rural areas. Oppose a poverty so bad that it even strangles love. Live for a life outside of money by fighting for an income for everyone. Don't turn your suffering neighbours into enemies.

People say that there are too many sellers on the streets and that the ones from outside must go. We need to ask ourselves why only a few companies can own so many big shops, why the police harass and steal from street traders and why the traders are being driven out of the cities. The poor man cutting hair and the poor woman selling fruit are not our enemies. Don't turn your suffering neighbours into enemies.

We all know that if this thing is not stopped a war against the Mozambicans will become a war against all the amaShangaan. A war against the Zimbabweans will become a war against the amaShona that will become a war against the amaVenda. Then people will be asking why the amaXhosa are in Durban, why the Chinese and Pakistanis are here. If this thing is not stopped what will happen to a place like Clare Estate where the people are amaXhosa, amaMpondo, amaZulu and abeSuthu; Indian and African; Muslim, Hindu and Christian; born in South Africa, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Malawai, Pakistan, Namibia, the Congo and India.

Yesterday we heard that this thing started in Warwick and in the City centre. We heard that traders had their goods stolen and that people were being checked for their complexion, a man from Ntuzuma was stopped and for being 'too black'. Tensions are high in the City centre. Last night people were running in the streets in Umbilo looking for 'amakwerkwere'. People in the tall flats were shouting down to them saying 'There are Congelese here, come up!" This thing has started in Durban. We don't know what will happen tonight.

We will do everything that we can to make sure that it goes no further. We have already decided on the following actions:

1. We will resuscitate our relations with the street traders' organisations and meet to discuss this thing with them and stay in daily contact with them.

2. We have made contact with refugee organisations and will stay in day to day contact with them. We will invite them to all our meetings and events.

3. We have made contact with senior police officers who we can trust, who are not corrupt and who wish to serve the people. They have given us their cell numbers and have promised to work with us to stop this immediately if it starts in Durban. We will ask all our people to watch for this thing and if it happens we'll be able to contact the police that we can trust immediately. They have promised to come straight away.

4. We will put this threat on the agenda of all of our meetings and events.

5. We will discuss this in every branch and in every settlement in our movement.

6. We will discuss this with our allied movements like the Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign and the Landless People's Movement so that we can develop a national strategy.

7. In the coming days our members are travelling to the Northern Cape, the North West, Johannesburg and Cape Town to meet shack dwellers struggling against forced removal, corruption and lack of services. In each of these meetings we will discuss this issue.

8. We are asking all radio stations to make space for us and others to discuss this issue.

9. In the past we have not put our members born in other countries to the front because we were scared that the police would send them to Lindela. From now on we will put our members born in other countries in the front, but not with their fulll names because we still cannot trust all the police.

10. If the need arises here we will ask all our members to defend and shelter their comrades from other countries.

We hear that the political analysts are saying that the poor must be educated about xenophobia. Always the solution is to 'educate the poor'. When we get cholera we must be educated about washing our hands when in fact we need clear water. When we get burnt we must be educated about fire when in fact we need electricity. This is just a way of blaming the poor for our suffering. We want land and housing in the cities, we want to go to university, we want water and electricity – we don't want to be educated to be good at surviving poverty on our own.

The solution is not to educate the poor about xenophobia. The solution is to give the poor what they need to survive so that it becomes easier to be welcoming and generous. The solution is to stop the xenophobia at all levels of our society. Arrest the poor man who has become a murderer. But also arrest the corrupt policeman and the corrupt officials in Home Affairs. Close down Lindela and apologise for the suffering it has caused. Give papers to all the people sheltering in the police stations in Johannesburg.

It is time to ask serious questions about why it is that money and rich people can move freely around the world while everywhere the poor must confront razor wire, corrupt and violent police, queues and relocation or deportation. In South Africa some of us are moved out of the cities to rural human dumping grounds called relocation sites while others are moved all the way out of the country. Some of us are taken to transit camps and some of us are taken to Lindela. The destinations might be different but it is the same kind of oppression. Let us all educate ourselves on these questions so that we can all take action.

We want, with humility, to suggest that the people in Jo'burg move beyond making statements condemning these attacks. We suggest, with humility, that now that we are in this terrible crisis we need a living solidarity, a solidarity in action. It is time for each community and family to take in the refugees from this violence. They cannot be left in the police stations where they risk deportation. It is time for the church leaders and the political leaders and the trade union leaders to be with and live with the comrades born in other countries every day until this danger passes. Here in Durban our comrades to stand with us when the Land Invasions Unit comes to evict us or the police come to beat us. Even the priests are beaten. Now we must all stand with our comrades when their neighbours come to attack them. If this happens in the settlements here in Durban this is what we must do and what we will do.

We make the following demands to the government of South Africa:

- Close down Lindela today. Set the people free.
- Announce, today, that there will be papers for every person sheltering in your police stations.
- Ban the sale of land in the cities until all the people are housed.
- Stop all evictions and forced removals immediately.
- Do not build one more golf course estate until everyone has a house.
- Support the people of Zimbabwe, not an oppressive government that destroys the homes of the poor and uses rape and torture to control opposition.
- Arrest all corrupt people working in the police and Home Affairs.
- Announce, today, a summit between all refugee organisations and the police and Home Affairs to plan how they can be changed radically so that they begin to serve all the people living in South Africa.

*For further information please visit, or contact: S'bu Zikode: 0835470474; Zodwa Nsibande: 0828302707; Mnikelo Ndabankulu: 0797450653; Mashumi Figlan: 0795843995 Senzo (surname not given, he has no papers): 031 2691822

*Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

My writing this letter emerges from realisation of the seriousness of the scenes of "xenophobic attacks" we have been experiencing in South Africa over the past couple of days and as such would like to refer to this situation as "Democracy Betrayed-The Struggle Betrayed".

When the African National Congress (ANC) ascended to power in 1994, the politico-socio economic landscape of South Africa changed drastically. The people of the country, through their elected representatives, draw up a Constitution that stands to be one of the best in the world. The RDP was seen as the path to be taken in ensuring that the imbalances and inequalities that characterised the new South Africa would be addressed. Employment, education, health, housing and social security among others were promised. Due to perceived economic difficulties in the period of 1996-1997, RDP had to be removed and replaced by a neo-liberal economic policy, the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR), which, it was suggested, would "generate the necessary wealth which would ensure that the South African society realises the objectives as contained in the Freedom Charter adopted 55 years ago.

However, this policy has not "delivered" on its promises. As Paul Kingsnorth observes, the poor of South Africa have realised that the task of rebuilding their nation ultimately rest with them. "The foreigners are taking our jobs, women, homes, etc" the poor claim, therefore, "lets get rid of them". One of the things that needs to be realised is that this results from the frustration and dissatisfaction over service delivery in general and in particular, the economic situation that the poor find themselves in. The assumption, particularly with regards to employment, is that the foreign nationals are undermining the struggles that the "people" endured so as to ensure that SA has the labour laws and regulations it has, by overlooking such issues as the minimum wage, healthy working environment, proper working hours and so on.

People live in informal settlements with no access to sanitation, clean drinking water, electricity, housing, employment opportunities and so on. The need has arisen for the people to make known their feelings. However, how will killing fellow Africans correct the situation? The Constitution of South Africa guarantees rights and privileges to all people, including foreign internationals. Where do people get the idea that by ill-treating others, we can capture the attention of leaders and hence demand their immediate action? Indeed, most of us may not be experiencing what these people are experiencing on the ground, but definitely there are other mechanisms that can be used to raise such issues. Many people still have the conviction that by having a political leader and government come to our level and address the situation, then we can consider changing. This has not been the case, senior political figures and government officials are only sending press

Statements to condemn the situation, how the hell wills this work? It just shows the people that officials are not taking the situation with the seriousness that they should. This indeed is sending a negative reflection of SA to the world and the political leaders need to show some degree of leadership now!! People are dying and their only sin is of being foreigners. We all accept that the services promised to the people have not been delivered, Democracy has been betrayed, the struggle has been betrayed, but this is not the way to deal with the situation. South Africans need to realise that violent action is not the only way to solve problems, there are various legislations that have been promulgated to deal with such issues and people need to make use of these avenues.

Political education and sensitization around issues of xenophobia, service delivery and legislation need to be ensured. The culture of violence needs to be removed from Africa if Africa is to ensure that the dream of a better continent for all is realized.