From evolution to revolution(2)

Ambassador Professor Simbi Mubako

The Herald is pleased to share with its readers Part 2 of exclusive excerpts from the forthcoming book, The Zimbabwe Liberation Movement 1960-1980, a comprehensive work by Ambassador Professor Simbi Mubako, who was an active participant in the liberation movement and served as Minister of Justice in the first Cabinet of independent Zimbabwe.

***

Both ZAPU and ZANU were founded during the heydays of African nationalism when the empires of France, Belgium, Portugal and Britain were crumbling, giving way to African rulers who had been prominent in mobilising African opposition to colonialism.

In Britain’s African dependencies the example set by Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana was followed in Tanganyika, Botswana, Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, Malawi, Zambia and other countries which attained independent statehood during the 1960s.

The Zimbabwe political parties were part of that historical process and they hoped to achieve independence in much the same way.

Indeed, the policy of non-violence was endorsed by the All African People’s Conference in Ghana in 1958, with the Algerian delegation raising the only dissenting voice.

The conference gathered representatives from 25 countries including Rhodesia and Nyasaland.

The conference resolved to support “all forms of peaceful action” for gaining national independence but as a compromise violent retaliation like in the Algerian struggle would also be supported.”

It is legitimate to ask why the Algerian revolution did not immediately inspire the rest of Africa to take up arms against their colonial masters.

For most of Africa north of the Zambezi the answer must be that there were easier ways of winning independence.

After Ghana’s independence in 1957, Britain was clearly ready to concede independence to most of its territories that asked for it.

British readiness to decolonise was made abundantly clear by Prime Minister Harold Macmillan in his famous “Wind of Change” speech delivered in 1960 from Cape Town after he had visited Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Rhodesia and Swaziland.

I was one of a group of students who demonstrated and heckled against the British Prime Minister when he arrived in Swaziland.

It was a pleasant surprise to listen to the speech delivered with pomp and symbolism from the citadel of European colonialism bluntly telling white settlers that the wind of change would inevitably bring black self-rule to the African continent.

President Charles de Gaulle virtually forced independence on the French territories, except Algeria. And in 1960 the Belgians also dropped their sprawling Congo empire.

The more perceptive African leaders who gathered at Accra must have felt that one should not rouse war passions for what one can get over a cup of tea, and for that judgement they are not to be blamed.

Where they went wrong was in supposing that the same prescription was universally applicable in Ghana and the Congo as in Angola, Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa.

They also failed to give proper weight to the impact of the Kenyan uprising on the decolonisation process.

However, non-violence had in fact, been tried for many years without success on the African continent.

In South Africa, the non-violent movement reached its apotheosis in the 1950s with an unprecedented upsurge of protest zeal by the African National Congress of South Africa (SAANC), the South African Indian Congress (SAIC) and the Congress of Democrats (CoD).

The most widely publicised campaigns were the resistance to the eviction of Africans from Sophiatown in 1955, the bus boycott at Everton, and the consumer boycott of goods produced by firms controlled by supporters of the ruling National Party in 1959.

It is easy enough to see why, despite the South African experience, African leaders in Southern Rhodesia believed their country would be granted independence in the same way as other British colonies, i.e. at a constitutional conference.

The alternative was both unfamiliar and too daunting to contemplate, and in practical terms the option was simply not on since the logistical problems of sustaining a guerrilla struggle in the geopolitics of those days were insuperable.

However, the Zimbabwe leadership of the time has been criticised for failing to comprehend that the type of colonialism which they had in Southern Rhodesia, Algeria, Mozambique, Angola and South Africa was fundamentally different, and that in order to eradicate it a more potent prescription than protest would be necessary.

The Rhodesian settlers had shown in many ways that they intended to make the country a white man’s home.

They had become self-governing in 1923; made a desperate bid to create a white dominion in Central Africa of which they were the dominant partner; deposed three of their prime ministers for being too soft with the Africans; and had banned successive African political parties rather than share power with them. The Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) was formed in December 1961 to fill the political vacuum left when the National Democratic Party (NDP) was banned.

The NDP had replaced the Southern Rhodesia (SR) African National Congress under similar circumstances.

African leaders had thus far reacted to the banning of their parties by merely reconstituting the same organisation under a new name. In general, the leadership, the policies and the tactics remained the same.

A new line of thinking was indicated in July 1962 when the ZAPU national executive decided that when the Rhodesian Government banned the party as anticipated they would not form another party again, but would operate underground.

Unfortunately, there was no clear analysis or acceptance of what “underground work” would entail.

The party was indeed banned the same year and the leaders were again detained.

A period of despondency and dissension set in for the leadership as to what to do next, when it was realised that no underground action followed the ban and that the white settlers were even less disposed to compromise.

On instructions from the Reverend Ndabaningi Sithole who was based in London, I toured the country and visited some of the detained leaders including Robert Mugabe and his wife Sally who were restricted in Zvimba district, Jason Moyo in Bulawayo City, and Joshua Nkomo in Semukwe district.

I found and reported that what there was of an underground structure was not viable and the leadership was in serious disagreement on what should be done.

The leaders were released by the Rhodesian Front government which had come to power in December 1962 on a more uncompromising, racially divided, apartheid-policy platform, and their inability to operate underground brought to the surface a revolt which had been simmering for some time.

The Zimbabwe Liberation Movement 1960-1980 is well-illustrated with pictures of the period and will be published soon by African Publishing Group. [email protected]