Saturday, January 30, 2016

Public Intellectual Dialogue Between Students

Friday, January 29, 2016

Decentralizing the Central Bank of Tanzania (BOT)?


What is the meaning and implication of this move to BOT?


Before the privatization of NBC [National Bank of Commerce], all government entities banked there. That is because it was the government's main bank. But after the privatization of NBC, it became a free-for-all kinda situation.

This move is long overdue. The government doesn't need to bail out any of those private banks should they take risky moves in the name of safeguarding NSSF [National Social Security Fund] or the Dar es Salaam local government's coffers.

In fact, we are poised now to see BoT opening up its branches in every region of the country. That move should strengthen our fiscal and monetary policies. I'm looking forward to seeing the Karagwe municipality using its borrowing capacity from BoT to start offering its community better services. This is the true meaning of a decentralized economy.

It's time to run our economy the right way.


Back in the days, this is what BOT used to do.

I recall Mr. Nkurlu was head of domestic banking which had Currency, Bank Supervision and Government accounts.

It was centralized and easy audit and tracking how every penny flowed and flawed!

I am I support of this as Seppy mentioned! 


The Treasurer Registrar is exercising his role as custodian of government assets. It is important that state-owned institutions which are not in the productive sectors are brought into prudent control in so far as the revenues they collect are concerned. You have government agencies that are by and large collectors of non-tax revenue on behalf of the Exchequer. Yes, they play a service role, as Sumatra, Fair Commission, EWURA etc do. But the revenues they collect sometime go into expenditures that are not necessarily prudent. By opening revenue accounts with the BOT it is possible to instill, I hope, a sense of financial discipline in them. Question is whether these institutions shall earn any interest from BOT? What rates? 

You also have Social Security Funds which are also largely collectors of members' (employee) contributions. My argument has always been that even though the laws establishing these Funds provides that the Government guarantees honouring full contributions of members where the Funds go belly up, it is wrong to deem these institutions as parastatals per excellence. They should not be subjected to the same rigour of control as those institutions wherein the government has injected equity. If these Funds will also be required to bank with the BOT, they may lack the wherewithal to strike funding consortiums that enable them to leverage their funds for big investments and good returns that result in better returns for the members.

One of the injurious 'unintended' consequence of the Treasury Registrar's direction will be the adverse impacts on NMB and other commercial banks such as CRDB and Bank M that enjoy huge deposits from several parastatals. Some of these banks are listed on the DSM Stock Exchange and may experience a downward spiral in the value of their shares following possible declining profit performances. 

The large question for me is whether the decision that has been taken was tested through a number of considerations top most being how the government will benefit from the decision and second whether the consequences of the decision, in terms of its impact on and in the economy, and thus in tax revenues and jobs, was given serious consideration.

These are quick initial ideas and reactions.


Looking at the big picture, TR is right, both in law and in sheer financial management. Inaingia akilini. 

However, going to niceties of good corporate governance, BoT will have to pay interest on call account rates. This is because BoT will be trading on the funds or using them to gauge their capital adequacy: for all intents and purposes the domestic banking directorate of BoT is a commercial bank like any other.

Secondly, there may have to be a GN of some kind. When I headed finance in TANESCO, we were responsible only to the Board. Only the Minister (of Energy) could give directions "of a specific nature or a general nature" to the Board. This is the situation in most of the "old" parstatals that I know of.

Though there was a TR representative on the Board, it's a pity the letter does not cite the explicit section of the law that gives TR these powers. A crafty CAG could hit you with an audit query if, for instance, BoT mismanaged those funds (EPA? ESCROW?).

Ningekuwa bado niko kazini TANESCO nisingetekeleza unless walau nipate Board Resolution, ingawa katika enzi hizi za majipu utahitaji usiwe na majipu ili uwe na msimamo wako kitaaluma kwi.


Thursday, January 28, 2016

Integrating or Ghettoising the Gender Question?

Issa Shivji's Clarifying Points about Integrating the Gender Question within the Political Economy of Neoliberalism

I'm glad that this debate is beginning to pick up. I wish there was a greater interrogating of the theoretical framework I proposed in the initial posting. I'm sure it is on the way. There are a couple of preliminary points, though, I would like to clarify.

1(a). Both Chambi's and Deborah's critique is that my intervention is too abstract; that it doesn't take into account empirical facts on the ground. Of course, it is ABSTRACT. By definition, a theorisation is an ABSTRACTION from the mass of empirical data and observations to make sense of it; to understand and explain the reality. A theory, therefore, is neither descriptive nor prescriptive - it is by its very nature argumentative and cognitive. The context in which the "Quick Note" was written was to try and integrate the gender question within the bigger picture of the system of neo-liberal political economy as it currently operates in our countries. The idea was how do we move away from the usual "tokenism" paid to the gender question by add-ons or tag-tos to other questions etc - in other words, to move away from the now too-often a practice of "ghettoising" the gender question. 

(b). The "Quick Note" focussed on the forms of exploitation of wo/man labour as producers of value (surplus value) on the one side and the character of accumulation (primitive accumulation) on the other. The colonial migrant system (manamba) was given to illustrate how capital penetrated the agrarian sector in its quest of primitive accumulation, which was the dominant form of accumulation in the colonial period. (In the interregnum, the immediate post-colonial or the nationalist period, I argued, CA and and PA were in tension as various policies were to install CA, which attempt was defeated) and went on to argue that the dominant character of accumulation under neo-liberalism IS primitive accumulation taking on new forms and producing and reproducing new social groups (including Deborah's precariat) etc. One would have liked to know if that theorisation does or does not capture - in the meaning of explaining and understanding - the existing neo-liberal reality on the ground. Unfortunately, neither Chambi nor Deborah address this central premise of the "Quick Note". 

2. Chambi saw this as a REPLAY of the debate of the late 1990s following MacAuslan's draft law quoting in extenso Dzodzi's narration of the arguments. I don't think it is a REPLAY at all. That was the debate of a different order. In fact, there was no attempt at all to theorise in terms of political economy. One theoretical point made in passing by the Land Commission - contrasting accumulation from below to accumulation from above - was never taken up. The debate was much more at the level of advocacy and lobbying of law-makers etc. To be honest, at the time, we hadn't even realised the extent of the intensity of neo-liberalism - we were still at the level of opposing SAPs on merit (rather demerit!), so to speak. Dzodzi well summarises the arguments/positions in the debate but, understandably, does not touch on the underlying political economy nor politics of it. (As an aside, it would be interesting for researchers to return to that debate and unearth the politics behind it, particularly the role played by the so-called "donor community"). Of course, there is a link between what we are debating now and what we were debating then, but that does not mean it is a replay.

So we continue ... ....!

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

A Deagrarianization Take on Gender Relations

Many thanks for bringing the debate on gender and agrarian relations to the fore. Just a few thoughts on what has been written.

I would agree that Shivji's abstract theoretical analysis fits the colonial period when rural men migrated to plantations and mines or produced cash crops in situ and rural women were ordained to stay at the homestead producing subsistence crops, giving birth and raising children. But that neat split in the gender division of labour is no longer prevalent. During the 1950s-1970s men's migration to plantations and mines largely faded away. From the 1980s, when the terms of trade for peasant agriculture plummeted in the wake of the global oil crisis, men started losing their role as agricultural export crop producers. They, as well as women and youth, entered the 'scramble in Africa', searching for viable forms of income-earning. For youth, urban migration became ever more prevalent. This came out in the survey work I've done with colleagues in Tanzania and indeed a similar pattern was found to prevail in the other African countries that we researched [Bryceson and Jamal (1997) Farewell to Farms; Bryceson, Kay and Mooij (2000) Disappearing Peasantries?; Bryceson and Bank (2001) Livelihoods, Linkages and Policy Paradoxes; Bryceson (2010) How Africa Works].

I would argue these transformative processes largely undermined the existence of the Tanzanian peasantry (as per my article that you circulated). What's left is an ageing countryside and an inchoate 'precariat' (male and female) who diversify their work activities according to the constraints and opportunities that they encounter. Rural men's and women's relationship to capital is largely the same - they exist, in the Marxist sense, as a 'reserve army of labour' for capital - except that these days labour is in super-abundance. It's long passed the time when the colonial assumption of an acute labour shortage held and a so-called backward sloping supply curve was believed to exist. As for what happens within the home, households are far less coherent socially and materially. Unlike peasant households where there was a clear complementary division of labour amongst family members to generate subsistence and commodified household production, households are now far more fluid in composition. Individual members often earn on their own account, rather than pool their income into a household purse. The notion of a male breadwinner lingers on primarily in some men's imagination. Women, however, remain the central 'reproducers' not only in terms of having babies, but caring for children and doing daily domestic labour. My view is that yes this is exploitation of women by men, but it's also usually a choice on the part of the women themselves and in effect it is their labour of love. They would not be able to tolerate the low standards of housework and childcare that most men haphazardly provide, if they are enlightened enough to try to tackle housework. Sorry if I sound like a female chauvinist!

Above all, I very much agree with you that empirical research is vital to knowing and understanding what's going on. With a foundational analytical grounding, the theory can follow from there. So much has happened over the last half century. It must be documented, published and widely disseminated. Tanzania is such a complex country and the more case studies and broader surveys that are done the better. But if the data stays in report form rather than more readable publications and other accessible forms of analytical communication, we will miss what is happening and the nature of on-going change will elude us.

Does Tanzania Need Fossil Fuel?

Michaela Collord's Preliminary Take on Bjørn Lomborg's Why Africa Needs Fossil Fuels

I can't pretend to be any expert in the energy sector (and I'm wary of personifying what Lomberg refers to as the naive western environmental activist), but I have a few major concerns with the piece. 

Now to dispense with the personal side briefly, Lomberg is a highly controversial character in climate science given his own lack of academic credentials and frequent dissimulation of the facts, both of which have attracted widespread criticism (see for example here). 

But attacking Lomberg does not deal with what is at base an appealing argument: Per capita electricity supply across Africa is extremely low; fossil fuels are a cheap and efficient way to generate electricity, unrivaled by renewables; therefore African states should invest more in fossil fuel-powered electricity generation. 
We can all agree on the first part of this argument. The problem comes with the second. 

First, Lomberg (seemingly willfully) misrepresents the energy generation potential of renewables (e.g. by characterizing solar panels as good for recharging a phone battery but nothing bigger). I don't have all the references at my fingertips now (I can come back with that later), but there is ample evidence from industrialized countries that investments in renewables can provide a viable alternative to fossil fuels. Germany and Denmark, for instance, have been able to generate the majority of their electricity from renewables at times when the weather conditions are favourable while in October last year wind was deemed the cheapest source of energy in the UK. 

Improvements in renewables technology have far outpaced expectations, bringing down the cost while improving efficiency. Yes, perhaps there can be backup electricity generation using fossil fuels, but renewables can do the job too. Regarding viability, it is also interesting to look at how China, which has invested hugely in the manufacture of solar panels in recent years, is now cutting deals with a number of different African governments (cf. Uganda) to set up large solar farms. 

Now leaving aside the viability of renewables vis-à-vis fossil fuels, of course Lomberg does not consider the development trade off in terms of increased air pollution and climate change. On air pollution, just look at how India and China have both been scrambling in recent years to introduce emergency measures to handle the high levels of smog that now routinely engulf their largest cities. The health implications in both countries (which if you prefer, we can also measure as a financial burden) have been enormous. 

Regarding climate change, of course there's the galling reality that industrialized, western countries are primarily responsible while developing countries now have to participate in the clean-up, but it's also true that climate change is a huge challenge for everyone (not least Tanzania, where among other things, projected sea level rise will pose a serious threat to Dar es Salaam). With developing countries now counting for over 60% of global CO2 emissions (and that figure is rising), we can't look to developed countries alone to act. As a result, there is an added incentive to invest in renewables now rather than lock in future CO2 emissions by taking the misleadingly easy route of fossil fuel-based electricity generation. It's a question of penny-wise pound-foolish. 

One last point in regard to Tanzania: If there is one thing the IPTL saga has taught us, it is that fossil fuels are not necessarily the quick fix they at first appear. There is some evidence that managing renewable energy generation offers fewer opportunities for rent seeking (which is perhaps another reason why it is less appealing to political elites - at least that is an argument that I have seen applied to the UK in recent years).

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Noting Shivji's Take on Gender&Agrarian Relations

A Swift Response to Shivji's Quick Notes on 'Conceptualising Gender and Agrarian Relations'

Chambi Chachage

"It is trite that facts don’t speak for themselves. You make them speak through a certain theoretical framework and ideological outlook, whether or not it is explicit or not" - Issa Shivji

Interpreting someone differently does not mean one has not read him/her closely. The author, as we have been reminded over and over again, does not have the 'monopoly' of how his/her readers 'interpret' him/her. Shivji's quick notes, though "tentative' and admittedly not "exhaustive", call for such scrutiny as the epigraph above also affirms. At the heart of this reignited debate on gendered agrarian relations is the apparent centrality of class in capitalist - and by extension, patriarchal - relations in contrast to gender. One only needs to read this line from the notes to see where Shivji is going with it and indeed where he is coming from, his afterwards bracketed elaboration about "multilayered" and "independent" existence notwithstanding: "Second, the patriarchal world is integrated in the neo-liberal world and dominated by it." This problematic, we can argue, stems from the tendency to privilege 'abstraction' at the expense of 'empirical' observation on the ground.

Inasmuch as we agree with Shivji that we "should not therefore shy away from abstraction, even if it proves difficult and non-activist on the face of it", it is quite clear that there comes a point when we need to go back to the 'post-colonial' household and look closely at this African peasant woman and the African peasant man therein. For a moment, we need to forget about the 'colonial' household that Shivji aptly describes this way: "The man was semi-proletarianised and the woman was peasantised." When we do so, we realise that both the village man and woman are generally peasantised in the neo-liberalised post-colonial and, in certain cases, are both semi-proletarianised if we accept, albeit reservedly, some of the premises from the champions of the contentious concept of deagraranisation

Inside this household what would we generally see? Exactly what Shivji refers in this liner: "The peasant woman subsidises capital by being superexploited both at the level of a producer as well as a reproducer." But when we ask him does this mean that when we talk about the peasant woman as a producer, what we are really talking about is her class (together and often in solidarity with the peasant man vis-a-vis capital) and when we talk about the woman as a reproducer, we are actually talking about her gender (apart though in relation to the peasant man versus capital), Shivji thus resorts/retreats to the safety of Marxian abstraction: "No I mean producer of commodities and reproducer of the labouring class."
Indeed but what is the African peasant man doing out there while the African peasant woman is reproducing this labouring class? Surely, reproduction even, in the biological sense, is not simply about giving birth. In other words, what is the role of this man when the woman is doing what Shivji (quoting Marjorie Mbilinyi) is doing, that is, "taking care of the old and sick, collecting firewood and fetching water, cooking etc etc"? Is this man generally experiencing the same exploitation from capital as the woman? No. Even Shivji seems to partly admits when he tweets: "Super-exploitation of the African peasant (often woman) is based on exerting super-human labour and living sub-human existence." But in his quick notes, Shivji quickly concludes: "Thus, if I may add, patriarchal division of labour is assimilated into capitalist process of production and reproduction." This 'subsuming' of 'gendered relations' as if capitalism predates patriarchy seems to be his answer to Dzodzi Tsikata whom she quotes as asking: "How do we embed the gender question in the radical political economy (by which I presume she meant Marxist [Political Economy])"?

Instantly some of us are compelled to ask Shivji, as we did informally sometimes in the recent past, about this capital that is exploiting (the labour) of both the African peasant woman and man. What is capital? Who is owning it? Aren't these owners the ones who are exploiting these men and women, albeit differentially, in terms of what some black feminists conceptualise as intersecting oppressions in regard to class, gender and race among other 'social categories' ? Sensing one is evading abstraction, Shivji could thus answer, as he once did: "Capital is not a thing - it is a relation." Yes. That is why we are still asking: Does this relation - this 'capitalist relation' - manifest itself the same way across the 'racial lines' and 'gender gap'? Or everything is (or simply appears as) class relation?

Friday, January 22, 2016

The Life and Times of Sam Moyo

For, that was Sam


We’ve grieved enough,

Now is the time to celebrate,

Celebrate a life,

Life of dignity and decency.

Sam was not just a scholar,

Not just a researcher,

Not just a comrade and a brother,

But a great human being.

No one could be better than Brian,

To fill in the context and the times,

Of Sam’s intellectual formation,

And his treasured contribution.

I need not fiddle,

Lest I spoil the broth, 

And invoke Sam’s smiling disapproval.

Yes, in disapproval too he smiled.

That was Sam!


I remember that day,

Many years ago,

The year I don’t remember,

But I remember Sam’s glistening eyes. 

We were bundled together,

In Mbagala Spiritual Centre,

For no spiritual reason,

But for a better reason, reason of frugality.

Three and five star hotel,

Hakiardhi didn’t covet,

Not that it was stingy, no,

But it saved; saved to pay for Sam’s fare.

Sam was lecturing, not to scholars or researchers,

Nor to preachers or propagandists, no.

He was conversing with peasants and pastoralists,

Maasai from Monduli, Women from Meatu.

In English he spoke, in Swahili we heard (through interpreter),

In eye-to-eye contact, in body-to-body language,

The audience was enthralled, Sam was thrilled.

Danced he, yes, to the grunts of pleasure and nods of approval.

They shook his hand and hugged him tight,

Huyu ni mwenzetu, they said,

He is one of us, I translated.

Sam’s eyes glistened.

That was Sam!


It was 2nd Nyerere Intellectual Festival, I believe,

Sam was in the front row, as Secondary School troupe walked in,

Sisi ni watoto wa Afrika, they sang,

Tujivunie Afrika yetu, they intoned.

I could see from the corner of my eye,

Sam was sumptuously taking it in,

He couldn’t restrain,

A tear ran down his cheek.

The MC announced,

The lyrics were by none other than Issa bin Mariam.

Sam gave me a long warm look,

My single human accolade, worth many an intellectual compliment. 

Never stingy in praise,

Never short of warmth and kindness,

Arrogance was foreign to him,

Humility was his second nature.

That was Sam!


It was August or September ,

Of the fateful year, 2015,

Sam accompanied Beatrice to Dar,

For Dar he liked.

Closeted in the hotel room during the day,

He worked intensely, smoked profusely.

Biriyani we ate, which he liked.

Pilipili mbuzi, he consumed, (alone), which he loved.

He only drank Savannah,

I assure you Beatrice,

For nothing else was on offer,

Under Parin’s strict command.

What an evening we had the next day,

With Beatrice and Kamata, Sam, Parin and I,

Indulging in nostalgia of the past,

Sharing hopes and fears for the future.

Kamata’s car wouldn’t start, 

We pushed and pushed, stubborn it proved,

Beatrice’s plea for taxi fell on deaf ear,

Sam didn’t want to hear.

(‘Coz he wanted to stay longer).

That was Sam!


This is not a poem,

Nor a flowery prose,

Much less a presentation,

For I’m good at none.

It is a humble present,

To my comrade,

And brother,

And a great human being.

Yes, a great human being,

For, that was Sam.


Issa Shivji on 'Salim Ahmed Salim: Son of the Soil’

Book Review of ‘Salim Ahmed Salim: Son of the Soil’

Book Review: Professor Issa Shivji 

Reading through these essays celebrating the life of Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim, I was intrigued by one fact. There is an uncanny convergence between Salim’s five decades of public life and the two important periods of Tanzania’s – even Africa’s – political history. Since his appointment as an ambassador in 1964, Salim spends the first five years picking his way down the diplomatic lane. Next ten years, he is his country’s top representative at the UN where he skillfully leads the diplomatic struggle for African liberation. These 15 years are also part of the post-independence nationalist period in Africa or the Bandung era of the Third World. This was undoubtedly a glorious period of recent African history, in spite of, or a wisecrack might say, because of, the Cold War. (Superpower rivalry allowed Africa to pursue its nationalist agenda with some consistency and vigour which would not have been easy in a unipolar world.) This is the era characterised by what the Chinese communists summed up as: 

Countries want independence, 

Nations want liberation, 

People want revolution. 

As chairman of the UN Decolonisation Committee, Salim leads the liberation struggle on the diplomatic front in the international arena. As chairman of the Frontline States, his mentor and role model, Mwalimu Nyerere, plans and guides the liberation war on the political front at the regional and continental level. There is admirable synergy between the two. Salim’s loyalty to Mwalimu is unquestionable. Nyerere’s faith in Salim is unreserved. But Mwalimu is a politician, a head of state; Salim is a diplomat, a loyal servant. Mwalimu could afford to call a spade a spade. At times, he would even exude anger, not to mention arrogance. Salim had to guard his language; he had to wear finesse, grace and elegance and, if necessary, even suffer fools. He could not afford controversy and avoided them. Yet, during his UN career he got into one, though not of his making. 

Standing by his conviction, he adroitly and successfully led the move to get China its rightful place in the UN against the vicious opposition of the US. US would never forgive him. Garnering overwhelming support from Africa, Asia, Latin America and the South Pacific, Salim bid for UN’s Secretary-Generalship in 1981. He was consistently opposed by the US. The election process was repeated 16 times over five weeks. Salim’s grace intervened. He withdrew from the subsequent vote (see chapter 3). His UN career came to an end in 1980.


He spent the next decade – the ‘80s – at home, variously occupying different portfolios including foreign, defence and prime minister and later, during the second phase, as deputy prime minister. A diplomat had now turned a politician but did not lose his grace, diplomatic language and subtlety. He discharged his duties with unrivalled humility. Power did not go to his head. Madaraka hayakuvuruga akili zake. And for that reason, combined with his humility, Salim did not, nor did he try to stand out or stand above his colleagues. As a diplomat during his UN days, Salim worked in synergy with Mwalimu. As a politician, in the ‘80s Salim worked in Mwalimu’s shadow. Mwalimu’s last term (1980-85) was the most difficult period for the country, and for Mwalimu, as the country was plunged in a deep economic crisis. Salim silently and out of public glare used his good contacts and rapport to mobilise aid from countries like Algeria, Libya, Cuba, China, India and the Scandinavian countries (chapter 2).

The eighties decade was one of the most difficult period for Africa and for Tanzania. It was a “forced” transition from nationalism to neo-liberalism. Salim lived through that transition at home. Once again, true to his diplomatic élan, he avoids controversy. He did, though, get into one, but once again, not of his own making. After Sokoine’s tragic death, there is no doubt that Salim was Mwalimu’s preferred candidate to succeed him. In Mwalimu’s estimation, Salim had all the qualities to lead the country, including his Zanzibariness, since it was widely accepted that the second phase president ought to come from Zanzibar. Little did Mwalimu realise that there were incipient elements within his own party prepared to jettison his principles. Mwalimu consistently fought against ethnicisation and regionalisation of politics. But some of his lieutenants in the party were not of the same ilk. Salim fell victim to some parochial elements in the Central Committee who successfully maneuvered against Salim’s candidature. Unfortunately, the full story has never been told. I was hoping to see it in chapter two that deals with ‘Salim in Tanzania’. Unfortunately, my fellow scholars, Professor Mpangala and Dr. Shule skirt round it with a tantalizing sentence: “Recognising Salim’s experience, integrity and commitment many Tanzanians tried to persuade him to stand for the presidency in 1985 as he was Nyerere’s preferred successor” (p.40). So, what happened then? a reader would justly ask. The essay doesn’t provide the answer. We are left in the dark. 


The ‘90s decade was the heyday of neo-liberalism. With the fall of the Soviet bloc countries, the world became unipolar. The end of the Cold War did not bring peace. It brought wars, hot wars. Within a decade, three countries lay in rubbles – Somalia, Libya and Afghanistan – and two more – Yemen and Syria - are on the brink of collapse. The militarization of the continent has gone apace with civil strife virtually all over the continent. It is in this situation that Salim returned to the diplomatic world, this time around at the head of the OAU. He remained at the helm of that continental organisation for 12 years - unprecedented three terms. The details of his activities and his relentless efforts to fight for peace on the continent are narrated in chapter four. I need not recapitulate them. I want to suggest that objectively Salim’s term at the UN must have been more satisfying then his twelve years at the helm of the OAU. For in the ‘70s, imperialism was on the defensive; nationalism and Bandung spirit were high. African and non- alignment blocs scored some significant successes at the UN. With all the challenges and frustrations, Salim’s diplomacy did pay dividends.

In the decade of the ‘90s, Africa faced a formidable single superpower. Even liberal and social-democratic governments in Europe had to toe the neo-liberal line. The Bandung bloc was much more differentiated than it had been in the ‘60s and ‘70s. Africa was liberated but not united. As chapter four shows, Salim constantly faced opposition from African states to his proposals for united African peacekeeping force. And the opposition was based on arguments of sovereignty just when the superpower and its allies were making mincemeat of African sovereignty. The most illustrative example is NATO’s refusal to let the African Union (AU) delegation led by President Zuma to land in Tripoli to attempt to reconcile warring factions. What appeared as worthy initiatives taken by OAU under Salim like ‘African-solution-to-African-problems’ or ‘responsibility to protect’ were turned on their head. ‘African-solution-to-African-problems’ was translated in practice to mean African soldiers fighting African militias on African soil financed by the US and trained by the Africom, eliciting even more terror attacks on African soil. The noble principle of responsibility to protect civilian populations against genocidal attacks irrespective of the principle of non-interference expounded by OAU under Salim was cynically used in Libya where NATO intervention was justified by R2P resolution of the UN. In spite of this difficult situation, Salim kept his fortitude and tried to carry out his mandate in dignity and in the best interest of the African people. No other person could have survived for three terms at the helm of OAU under such difficult circumstances. 


In 2001 Salim returns home but does not retire. He is called upon by various international organisations to lead peace missions. One of the most difficult was the one in Darfur. It would have been fascinating to have a chapter in the book on his work in the Darfur mission. Unfortunately, there isn’t one. I guess the editors must have been overwhelmed by Salim’s prolific work – they had to make choices.

On the home front, Salim, the humble diplomat, has again consciously tried to avoid controversies. But he got into one, this time of his own making! In 2005 he offered his candidacy in the presidential race. He successfully got through the organs of the party being among the three candidates presented to NEC. It was not easy. Tanzanian politics had undergone a sea change since Mwalimu. No longer the politics were clean or principled. He faced “vicious” campaign to tarnish his name, including rewriting of his historical record and doctoring of his 40-year-old photographs. But Salim never abandoned his dignity and decency.

He didn’t retaliate in kind. During the lobbying for NEC votes, his campaign team had strict instructions not to indulge in any malpractices. (I know this from an internal source.)

But he didn’t make it. Changing of goalposts ensured that he wouldn’t go through. ‘How could he’ I asked myself, ‘if he couldn’t during Mwalimu’s time?’ Again our authors of ‘Salim in Tanzania’ avoid discussing this episode.

I am of course aware and appreciate that these essays are celebratory. But in my view, it does not mean avoiding the controversies and adversities that your subject faces in his lifetime. It is precisely in such situations that the fine character of your subject comes out, as it did in Salim’s case. He came out of the fight for UN headship gracefully and with dignity. To this day Chinese visitors to Tanzania, including presidents and prime ministers, pay him a visit. They have not forgotten the role he played in the admission of that country into UN. Again, in the two controversial situations at home, he kept his dignity and personal integrity. But he must have been pained by the parochial – racial, ethnic, religious –  trends in our politics. He made a mental note of it and extracted it in his 2014 speech thanking AU for honouring him. (reproduced as chapter 5).

Perhaps drawing from his own experience but also witnessing what is going on in the continent, he warned, again in his typical diplomatic parlance:

The issue of systemic economic and political alienation of the majority of the African people that comes with the impressive record of economic growth and democracy has led to considerable tension in countries – tension between urban and rural, tension between ethnic groups, between the rich and the poor, between the security groups and the people, and even more worrisome tensions across religious lines.

The warning is timely both for the continent and for Tanzania. These fault lines are indeed becoming intense and can easily lead to fragmentation of our societies. This is where we, the intellectuals, need to focus, analyse and expose and condemn politicians who are using the fault lines in their own narrow interest.

Needless to say, I recommend the book and hope its gaps will be addressed in the second edition.

Salim Ahmed Salim is truly a son of the Pan-African soil. May he live long to continue his pan-African ambassadorship.

Jipu Hilo Jipu Gani?

Jipu Hilo jipu gani
Jipu lisilo na haiba
Jipu lisilo utani
Wala homa nasaba

Jipu liko ndani
Sistimu hukuna uhaba
Jipu limejaa uvundo usoni
Jipu lazima litumbuliwe

Bara na pwani
Mashariki kusini
Magharibi kaskazini
Mtumbuaji ashike pini
Huruma asiweke moyoni
Apasue jipu pwaaaa

Usaha uondoe nukhsani
Taifa letu adhimu
Lifurahie neema ya Mola mwenye Imani
Alotupa dhahabu na madini
Mito, mabonde, na mengi milimani
Hala Hala Watanzania, 
Shangilia awamu yenye nidhamu

© Leila Sheikh

Thursday, January 21, 2016

Jipu Kuu

Jipu Kuu 

Kuna jipu na majipu, matabibu hutujulisha
Lipo lilo kama upupu, huwasha kwa bashasha! 
Ukubwae wa kikapu, hutuvimbia kama kasha
Kuu hili la Majipu, lini tatumbuliwa Asha?

Lishaiva hilo jipu, mbona bado twajipasha?
Au hadi twanguke pu, ndo twache kulilisha?
Hatuuchoki huu utupu, wauchekao Watasha?
Kuu hili la Majipu, lini tatumbuliwa Asha?

E Mtumbua Majipu, twaona rasha rasha
Sasa situmie diripu, wasiseme la hasha!
Libane kama tiripu, litoboke bila kubisha
Kuu hili la Majipu, lini tatumbuliwa Asha?

Uchungu wa vijipu, asiyeujua Washawasha
Muwashwa wa Kishapu, utungu wamtosha!
 Jipu Kuu la Majipu, lioshwe kama Muosha
Kuu hili la Majipu, lini tatumbuliwa Asha?

© Malenga Mdadisi

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Alichokisema CAG kuhusu Ujasiriamali wa Kisiasa

"Mimi nafikiri inawezekana ikawa Escrow ni sehemu ndogo ya sehemu kubwa ya utendaji mbaya kwa watu katika nchi yetu. Tunazungumzia kitu kinaitwa Entrepreneurial Politics [Ujasiriamali wa Kisiasa], yaani kuchanganya siasa na ujasiriamali. Kwa hiyo watu wanaingia katika siasa lakini kwa nia ya kwamba wapate faida binafsi katika siasa. Na jambo hili likitokea mara nyingi inatokea watu kutafuta ujanja ujanja wa kuweza kupata pesa. Na kama utatazama mambo yote yaliyofanyika zamani: Uuzaji wa nyumba za Serikali, unawapa watu wafanye uamuzi, watu ambao wao wenyewe ni beneficiaries [wafaidika]; hiyo ni moja katika mfano wa political entrepreneurship [ujasiriamali wa kisiasa]. Ukitazama lile suala la uchukuaji wa pesa za Benki Kuu ya Tanzania, ni ishu hiyo hiyo ya political entrepreneurship, watu wanachanganya faida binafsi na maamuzi ambayo wanatakiwa kufanya katika ofisi za Serikali. Jambo hilo tukishindwa kulidhibiti matatizo haya huenda yakawa mengi zaidi. Na tunafikiri kwamba katika kipindi hiki Mungu amejalia tupo sisi tutalisemea zaidi jambo hilo" - Profesa Mussa Assad

Monday, January 18, 2016

Ngoswe Hatunaye? Kwaheri Ndugu Edwin Semzaba

Hivi karibuni nilikutana na jirani yetu wa zamani wa Ubungo Flats, Ndugu Edwin Semzaba. Nikajiuliza mara mbili mbili nimsalimie au 'nimpotezee' maana alikuwa hanifahamu kwa sura kwa kuwa aliniona ningali nikiwa mdogo. Moyoni nikajiambia ni vyema kuwashukuru waandishi ambao uandishi wao umetugusa. Hivyo, nikamkumbusha na kumjulisha kwamba nilipokuwa sekondari nilisoma kitabu chake cha 'Ngoswe: Penzi Kitovu cha Uzembe'
Lo, kumbe ilikuwa ndiyo buriani. Mwandishi huyo mahiri sasa ametutoka. Tutamkumbuka kwa kuweza kutufundisha, kwa namna yake, kuhusu umuhimu wa 'hapa kazi tu' hata pale ambapo penzi limekolea na hata kutishia kutupofusha. Kitabu hicho cha Ngoswe kiliwahi pia kujulikana kama 'Hesabu Iliyoharibika' kwa kuwa kijana huyo msomi alipoteza madodoso aliyoyatumia kukusanya takwimu za wakazi mbali mbali wakati wa Sensa ya Taifa. Sakata hili ilitokea alipojaribu kutoroka na Binti wa Mzee mmoja (kama sikosei Mwenyekiti) wa kijiji alichofikia. Hakika alifanya kosa la kuvunja maadili ya utendaji, yaani, kuchanganya 'penzi' na 'kazi'.
Lakini pia kitabu hicho kilitufundisha umuhimu wa wazazi (wenye upendo mkubwa) kutoyaingilia kati mapenzi ya watoto wao kwa jazba na ukali. Busara ingetumika zaidi inawezekana takwimu za sensa zingesalimika. Pengine ingepatikana namna ya kuipatanisha 'kazi' na 'penzi' ili angalau Serikali yetu isipoteze taarifa muhimu za kuwasaidia wananchi wake na nguvukazi ya kulijenga taifa letu. Hilo hakika lilikuwa fundisho tosha kwetu kuhusu uadilifu kazini na uhakika wa takwimu tunazozikusanya ambazo siku za hivi karibuni zimehojiwa kwa kina na mtafiti aitwaye Morten Jerven.
Tuwashukuru waandishi wetu wangali hai. Wakitutoka tuendelee kuzienzi kazi zao. Asante Edwin Semzaba. Ngoswe atasomeka.

Saturday, January 16, 2016

Unsung Heroes: Remembering Bonaventure Swai

Monday Mangvwat:

Closely related to Professor Temu was another Tanzanian Professor with whom I became closely associated. He was Professor Bonaventure Swai, a younger and more intellectually restless scholar whose Ph.D. thesis was supervised by the same Temu back at the University of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam. He had joined the history department at A. B. U. on the encouragement of his teacher who had recommended him to the Head of Department. He was excessively critical and tore apart almost every argument I was putting forward until Temu would calm both of us down. Professor Swai was uniquely well-read and knowledgeable but highly critical and impatient with any scholar who could not keep pace with his thinking. Together with Temu, they authored the famous book, Historians and Africanist History: A Critique published by Zed Publishers, London, 1981, while they were still in Zaria. Swai eventually left Zaria for the Usmanu Danfodio University, Sokoto, and finally left Nigeria for the University of Uganda, Gulu, where he took ill and passed on; may his soul rest in perfect peace. I will never forget him.

Obadiah Mailafia:

Ndugu Bonaventure Swai was one of the most profound thinkers of his generation in the philosophy of the historical sciences. As a student of Ahmadu Bello University and later Assistant Lecturer, I remember Swai as relatively younger but serious scholar in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences as it then was. For some reason, there were a few bookworms that featured prominently in the Sir Kashim Ibrahim Library. The library would always close with us at 11pm. One of them was Swai. Another was the great historian Mahmud Tukur, who died young. Believe it or not, one chemist was a constant presence in the social sciences section of the library. And that person was none other than the rather shy Umaru Musa Yar'Adua, who later became President of our great Federal Republic, as everybody knows. 

Swai was a quiet and self-effacing character. But he was a thinker and scholar of great moral force. Swai's work and interests were mainly in the area of historiography and the philosophy of history. I do not think he was a lesser historian because of that orientation. There are historians who are mainly story-tellers. There are others who are mainly philosophers. The greatest are those who combine both, from Herodotus and Thucydide to R. G. Collingwood, Geoffrey Barraclough, Eric Hobsbawm, Arnold Toynbee and Toyin Falola. The fact that Ndugu Swai concentrated mostly on historiography and philosophy of history should never be held against him. I was privileged to sit respectfully in their company in the University Staff Club where I drank from their fountain of wisdom. The older scholar, Arnold J. Temu, was a benign influence. Sadly, it was rumoured that when Swai moved to Sokoto he was rather unhappy in that provincial Saharan outpost, eventually succumbing to alcohol. Without engaging in stereotypes, we West Africans would tend to be baffled by the drinking habits of Eastern and Southern Africans. It would seem that we drink to socialise, but they seem to socialize in order to drink. Forgive me!

My own study of history never passed A'Levels, but for reasons I cannot fathom, I have made it a point to read all of the most serious historians of the world from Michelet to Braudel and Lord Conrad Russell. I never believe that anyone could be a good public finance specialist or statesman without a profound knowledge of history.

Swai belonged to a thriving community of exile Southern and Eastern African scholars at ABU in those good old days, which included people such as A. J. Temu earlier mentioned; economist John Sangwueme and political scientist Lloyd Mambo Sachikonye, both of Zimbabwe; political scientist Okello Oculi and medical sociologist Mukanga Tibenderana both from Uganda and novelist/literary scholar Njabulo Ndebele from South Africa. Together with a glitterati of scholars from other African countries and from the Caribbean, the United States, Australia and even Poland, Ahmadu Bello University was a truly cosmopolitan community of scholars. We had the best and we knew it!

Yinka Banwo:

Bonaventure Swai was my teacher at ABU. He was a great teacher, thinker and philosopher. We learnt a lot from him. He is one of the teachers we still talk about in any meeting with old school mates.

For some of Swai's papers you may check with the History Department ABU Zaria, part of the collection in the History department Seminar series. I think he wrote a paper on "Marx, Marxism and the Third World" for the Marx and Africa conference in Zaria, 1983; Another paper on Historians and Africanist History(Different with the book he co-authored with Temu), probably another one on 'Objectivity in History' (not too sure about this). You may also check with the History Department at Uthman Dan Fodio University, Sokoto. 

Malami Buba:

How sad and ironic for Prof Swai's move to 'that provincial Saharan outpost' to lead to alcoholism! To be fair to my hometown, Swai's sobriety was few and far between. The two memories I have of him as a lowly GA at UDUS was his 'my friend' catchphrase, and the warning for drinkers to obey traffic rules when sober, so that going home after a 'pub crawl' will be a safe affair! A quiet and gentle scholar, no doubt!

Ibrahim Abdulla:

Swai left Nigeria without looking back! He was not too happy in Sokoto. When he trooped back to East Africa that was it....
Bill Freund:

I was very interested in your query/note about Swai. I was a visiting lecturer at UDSM in the last months of 1979 in the History Department some time after leaving the equivalent department at Ahmadu Bello University (ABU). As to the Nigerian reference, Monday Mangvwat was a very bright young man, the best student I ever encountered at ABU although I know almost nothing about what he did professionally so I am grateful for the extract which will allow me to note and order his monograph. All those he mentioned in his acknowledgements as his colleagues were my students as well. I knew Bala Usman very well too and the formidable Abdullahi Smith a bit, who was not based in Zaria but had an institute he ran in Kaduna. So this was my world in the middle 1970s and it had a strong influence on my own intellectual development. Arnold Temu was our HOD for my last year at ABU and I also knew him very well and we are still in touch.

At UDSM, I got to know Bonaventure Swai quite well and we were really friends. He wrote a good if not very unconventional thesis and I liked his writing on Marxism and historiography in Africa very much. It is sad indeed if his book on historiography in Africa has been forgotten; it influenced me a lot. He was a voracious reader who (too many years ago to remember exact words, of course) was absorbed by the world he discovered in books he found persuasive to the point of exit from the real world but I have this trait too to some degree. You will of course know that practical life became very hard for Tanzanian academics around 1980 and after so individuals were inclined to emigrate. I knew that Swai went to Sokoto, a new campus in a very provincial setting, and eventually on to Uganda. I think psychologically this did not work for him and he probably felt very isolated. I felt very badly when I heard of his death. I am sure people of his generation in Tanzania must remember him well and Temu, with his own trajectory, certainly could give you much information about Swai and maybe something about the location of his papers.

Lawrence Mbogoni:

I had the privilege of being taught by Dr. Swai in my third year as an undergrad in 1977 in a course that required writing a senior paper. By his guidance and persistent criticism from a materialist viewpoint of history I was able to turn in a paper that apparently impressed him to want me to join the History Department at UDSM. After two years of teaching at Galanos secondary school, one afternoon Dr. Swai called me and asked if I was ready to join the department as a tutorial assistant. I accepted his offer and joined the department in January 1980. As a mentor and a colleague, Dr. Swai contributed greatly to what I have turned out to be academically. In the course of teaching together before I left Dar for the USA and he left for Zaria we became very close friends. As Malami says, he was indeed a quiet and gentle scholar.

As for his papers, some ought to be available in the East Africana Section of the Library at UDSM. I know he presented numerous papers as part of the History Department Seminar program. These were at the time bound and catalogued by the East Africana Section. 

May his soul rest in eternal peace.

Issa Shivji:

Swai was another of our unsung heroes who was not given sufficient recognition by his alma mater, UDSM.

Reflections on Post-2015 Tanzania Elections

Wednesday, January 13, 2016

Athari za Muda Mrefu za Mapinduzi ya Zanzibar

Athari za Muda Mrefu za Mapinduzi Matukufu ya Zanzibar

Chambi Chachage

"Kasha lililofungwa ni vyema lifunguliwe watu wajuwe kilichomo" - Ripoti ya 'Hali ya Kisiasa na Kijamii Tanzania na Uwezekano wa Kupatikana Amani ya kweli Zanzibar'

Nilipokuwa shule ya msingi Mlimani nilifundishwa kuhusu mapinduzi ya Zanzibar katika somo la Siasa. Mwalimu wangu, Mama Kihongo, alikuwa ni kada wa Chama cha Mapinduzi (CCM). Hizo zilikuwa ni enzi za chama kimoja kushika hatamu.

Kwa muda mrefu sana nimekuwa 'muumini' wa historia hiyo ya mapinduzi. Lakini hiki kilichotokea jana katika maazimisho ya miaka 52 ya mapinduzi hayo kimenifanya nikumbuke kile ambacho kijana mmoja aliwahi kuniambia nilipokuwa Zanzibar. Alinishauri nifuatilie jinsi jamii ilivyogawanyika kuhusu athari za mapinduzi.

Alichokuwa anamaanisha ni kwamba hadi leo kuna watu ambao wana hofu kutokana na mapinduzi hayo kufanywa ni suala la 'weusi' wanaojiona wao ndiyo 'waafrika' dhidi ya wasio 'weusi' wanaoonwa - au kujiona - kuwa ni 'waarabu' ama 'waajemi'. Hapo katikati wanaangukia hao ambao eti leo wanaitwa 'machotara', yaani, wanaonekana kuwa siyo 'weusi' wa kutosha kuwa 'Waafrika' wala siyo 'weupe' wa kutosha kuwa 'Waarabu' na 'Waajemi'.

Wanahistoria wa uchumi wana kitu wanakiita 'matokeo au athari ya muda mrefu' ya tukio' fulani. Hutumia kanuni na mbinu mbalimbali za kitakwimu kupima jinsi athari/matokeo, kwa mfano ya ukoloni na utumwa au ubaguzi uliotokea zamani, yanavyoendelea tu kwa muda mrefu hadi leo katika jamii iliyokumbwa na matukio hayo.

Labda huu sasa ni wakati mwafaka wa kuangalia kwa kina matokeo/athari chanya na hasi za muda mrefu za mapinduzi. Hii itatusaidia kujua ni namna gani tunaweza kutatua 'mkwamo wa kisiasa (na kiuchumi)' visiwani Zanzibar. La sivyo tutaendelea kubaki kwenye mataruma hayo hayo ya reli pale tulipokwamia.

Jambo mojawapo muhimu lililotokea mwaka 1964 ni kuundwa kwa 'Jamhuri ya Watu wa Zanzibar.'  Lakini hii haikuwa jamhuri ya kawaida tu kama ile ya Tanganyika iliyopatikana mwaka 1962. Hii Ilikuwa ni ya kimapinduzi kama ile iliyoundwa nchini Cuba baada ya mwaka 1959. Ndiyo maana uongozi wake wa juu wa Serikali ulikuwa chini ya 'Baraza la Mapinduzi'. Hakukuwa na fursa kwa yeyote ambaye siyo 'mwanamapinduzi' kuwaongoza Wazanzibari.

Hivyo, vyama vilivyojulikana kama Zanzibar Nationalist Party (ZNP) na Pemba People's Party (ZPPP) havikuwa na nafasi ya wazi tena katika medani ya siasa. Kwa nini? Kwa sababu vyenyewe ndivyo ambavyo viliunda 'serikali' ilipinduliwa baada kuungana na kushinda uchaguzi wa mwaka 1963 ulioipa Zanzibar 'uhuru' ambao haukotofautiana sana na ule iliyoupata Tanganyika mwaka 1961. Angalau kulikuwa na mwanya kidogo kwa wanachama wa UMMA Party kujitutumia kisiasa. Lakini hata hiki chenyewe kililazimika kujivunja na 'kujiunga/kumezwa' na chama pekee, yaani Afro- Shirazi Party (ASP), katika mfumo mpya wa chama kimoja.
Uhalali wa iliyokuwa Serikali ya Zanzibar ya mwaka 1963 ni suala ambalo limewagawa wakazi wa Zanzibar japo haliongelewi sana kwa uwazi kutokana na hofu ya kuonekana unapinga 'Utukufu' wa Mapinduzi. Kitu kilichonishangaza hivi karibuni wakati natafiti historia ya kuundwa kwa iliyokuwa Jumuiya ya Kuiunganisha Afrika, yaani Organization of African Unity (OAU), mwaka 1963 ni uwepo wa Zanzibar kama mwanzilishi mmojawapo. Ilikuwaje (Serikali ya) Tanganyika ikalikubali hilo litokee wakati huo?

Inaonekana bado kuna uhusiano mkubwa kati ya Zanzibar ya mwaka 1963 na Zanzibar ya leo. Tatizo tunalolipata ni kudhani Zanzibar iliyoundwa ('upya') mwaka 1964 inaweza kuendelea leo bila mabadiliko makubwa ya mfumo wa serikali yatakayotatua kile ambacho kilijaribiwa kutatuliwa kwa mapinduzi. Kilichoundwa wakati huo kiliundwa (zaidi) kwa ajili ya 'waumini' wa mapinduzi.

 Zanzibar pia ina watu (wema) ambao siyo waumini wa mapinduzi. Hatuwezi kuwaita 'wahaini'. Wao wanachoamini ni kwamba labda kama mapinduzi hayo yasingetokea basi Zanzibar ingefuata nyayo kama za Tanganyika iliyopata uhuru ikiwa na Waziri Mkuu chini ya Malkia kisha baadaye ikapata Jamhuri yake chini ya Rais. Japo hatuwezi kujua kwa uhakika nini hasa kingetokea, kuna uwezekano kuwa Zanzibar iliyopata uhuru ikiwa na Waziri Mkuu chini ya Sultani nayo baadaye ingeweza kuwa Jamhuri chini ya Rais hasa ukizingatia zote mbili zilipata 'uhuru' wao kutoka kwa Uingereza.

Mapinduzi yalijaribu kuliharakisha hilo mwaka 1964. Mwisho wake ilichokiita 'Jamhuri ya Watu wa Zanzibar' ikawa chini ya 'Serikali ya Mapinduzi ya Zanzibar (SMZ)' badala ya 'Serikali ya Watu wa Zanzibar'. Sasa iweje leo tudhani kwamba itakuwa kazi rahisi tu kwa watu wasioonekana kuwa na 'mamlaka' ya 'kuyalinda' mapinduzi hayo japo nao ni Wazanzibari watoe Rais wa Zanzibar?
Tukubali kwamba hata muundo wa Serikali ya Umoja wa Kitaifa (GNU) nao haujafanikiwa vilivyo kuondoa kiini hicho kikuu cha tatizo, yaani, ulazima wa Zanzibar kuwa Serikali ya Mapinduzi. Ili kulielewa suala hili ni vyema mtu akajiuliza hivi huko Cuba kwa sasa kuna nafasi ya mwanasiasa au chama chochote ambacho sicho kilicholeta mapinduzi kutwaa madaraka na kuiongoza nchi hiyo?

Profesa Chachage na watafiti wenzake waliwahi kuichambua 'Hali ya Kisiasa na Kijamii Tanzania na Uwezekano wa Kupatikana Amani ya kweli Zanzibar' mwaka 2006. Baada ya kuirejea historia ya mapinduzi na matokeo yake ya baadaye, walizungumzia suala hili linalosaidia kuelewa kwa nini sakata la Chama Cha Wananchi (CUF) na CCM linatokana na tafsiri kinzani kuhusu Mapinduzi:

"Kwa mfano, kuna kundi linahusisha Mapinduzi ya Zanzibar na ukabila yaani kwamba yalihusu weusi kuuangusha utawala wa waarabu na marafiki zao. Kundi hili linahoji uhalali wa mapinduzi na kudai kwamba matatizo yote ya Zanzibar yanatokana na Mapinduzi ambapo kuna watu wa kabila fulani walinyang'anywa mali zao (ardhi, majumba, n.k.) na wengine kupoteza maisha. Kwa upande mwingine kuna kundi ambalo hupinga msimamo huu kwa kejeli kwamba wenzao wanataka kurejesha utawala wa Kiarabu ambao ulikuwa wa kinyonyaji na kibaguzi dhidi ya Waafrika na Washirazi wa Zanzibar. Hapa utengano mkubwa umetokea. Kuna wanaopinga Mapinduzi na wanaotetea Mapinduzi kwa kila hali. Wanaodaiwa kupinga mapinduzi wanaonekana hawana ajenda nyingine yeyote isipokuwa kuvunja muungano na kurudisha utawala wa kiarabu!"
Chachage na wenzake wanaendelea kuelezea hivi mgongano huo:

"Kwa hiyo pande hizo mbili ndizo zimekuwa zikipima ni nani ni mwenzetu na nani siyo mwenzetu. Hii imepelekea kubagua watu ambao wanaonekana siyo wenzetu wasishiriki katika mambo ya kitaifa yawe ya kiuchumi au ya kisiasa. Matokeo yake ni kwamba katika jamii ya Zanzibar sasa hivi kuna kiwango kikubwa sana cha kutoaminiana baina ya viongozi wa vyama vikubwa vya siasa nchini humo pamoja na wafuasi wao. CCM inaonekana ni ya Unguja na inajiona kuwa ni mlinzi wa Mapinduzi na Muungano bila kuthibitisha hilo kwa vitendo vinavyowaongezea wananchi maslahi; na CUF inaonekana ni ya Pemba na inajiona yenyewe inabaguliwa na ina jukumu la kurejesha demokrasia, haki na kuboresha maisha ya wananchi wa Zanzibar."

Baada ya maelezo hayo ya kina akina Chachage wanakiri kwamba:

"Ni kweli, kwa mfano, kwamba uwiano wa kiuchumi kati ya Unguja na Pemba siyo mzuri. Pamoja na kwamba hali ya Unguja kiuchumi siyo nzuri pia lakini ni kweli kwamba hali ya Uchumi na maisha ya Pemba ni duni kuliko ile ya Unguja. Watu wametumia hili kuonesha kwamba Pemba inabaguliwa kwa makusudi na wale walio madarakani - CCM. Zimekuwepo hisia pia kwamba Wapemba wanabaguliwa eti kwa sababu hawakushiriki katika mapinduzi. Kwa kuwa CUF ina nguvu zaidi Pemba nao wamefanikiwa kutumia ukweli huu kama mtaji wa Kisiasa. Sababu za kutokuwa na uchumi mzuri na miundombinu pia inatajwa kwamba imewafanya wapemba wasiwekeze Pemba ndio maana wanakimbilia kuwekeza na kufanya biashara, Unguja, DSM [Dar es Salaam], Tanga, na kwingineko. Kuna kauli kwamba ni aibu kwa Mpemba kuwa mwanachama wa CCM. Mpasuko huu unawafanya wale ambao wanaona mapinduzi yalikuwa halali kuamua kuwatenga hawa kama kundi linalopinga mapinduzi."
Sasa inabidi tukubali kwamba mapinduzi yalishatokea. Hatuwezi kurudisha nyuma gurudumu la historia. Ila tunapaswa pia tukubali kwamba kile ambacho mapinduzi yalikiahidi kuhusu demokrasia pana hakikuweza kutimia (kikamilifu) wakati wa mfumo wa chama kimoja na hayawezi kukitimiza katika mfumo wa vyama vingi ambapo sivyo vyote ni vya '(ki)mapinduzi'. Ahadi hizi za kihistoria ambazo timu ya utafiti ya Chachage imeziainisha kwa hitimisho lifuatalo zinaweza kutusaidia kuelewa kwa kina kwa nini mfumo mzima wa SMZ inabidi ubadilike ili kutoa fursa kwa Wazanzibari wote kuwa na fursa sawa ya kuongoza dola bila misingi ya nafasi yao ama ya wazazi wao katika (historia ya) mapinduzi bali msingi mkuu wa uzalendo wao kwa Zanzibar kisiasa, kiuchumi na kijamii:

"Hakuna ubishi kwamba hatua zilizochukuliwa na serikali ya Zanzibar zilikuwa kwa maslahi ya Wazanzibari wote. Hata hivyo itakuwa makosa kukataa ukweli kwamba kulikuwa na matatizo ambayo ndiyo msingi wa kile kinachoitwa leo migogoro ndani ya jamii ya Wazanzibar.... Hali halisi ya Zanzibar inatupa picha tofauti kwani usawa na haki ambavyo vilikuwa vimelengwa na Mapinduzi ya Zanzbar bado ni ndoto. Tunapaswa kukubali kwamba Mapinduzi hayakukamilika au kuna mambo ambayo hayakufuatiliwa na yakapotosha nia nzuri ya mapinduzi ya kujenga jamii sawa na huru. Hali ya sasa ya kiuchumi na kisiasa nchini Zanzibar ni ushahidi tosha kwamba uhuru na usawa haupo na hicho ndicho kiini kikuu cha matatizo yanayoikabili Zanzibar sasa hivi."

Endapo tutakubaliana na pendekezo lifuatalo walilolitoa Chachage na timu yake miaka kumi iliyopita tutainusuru Zanzibar na kadhia isiyoisha ya kuwagawa Wazanzibari 'kwa mujibu wa mapinduzi':

"Katika kushughulikia suala na tafsiri ya Mapinduzi kusiwe na ulazima wa kuwalazimisha wale walioathirika vibaya na Mapinduzi au ambao hawakuunga mkono Mapinduzi kwamba ni maadui wa Mapinduzi na hivyo kuonekana kwamba wanakosa uzalendo na utaifa. Anayekubali Mapinduzi akubali na anayeyakataa ayakatae kwa sababu zake mwenyewe. Kama ilivyokuwa watu hawalazimishwi katika kuabudu na hili suala la kutukuza au kubeza Mapinduzi libakie katika uhuru wa mtu binafsi [Kwa mfano si busara kumlazimisha mtu aliyeuliwa baba yake asiyekuwa na hatia au aliyteswa wakati wa Mapinduzi na baadaye abadilike ayatambue Mapinduzi na kuyatukuza. Kufanya hivyo ni kuwalazimisha watu wawe wanafiki kusema kile wasichokiamini.]"
Dhana hiyo ya 'uhuru wa kuamini' itatekelezeka pia kama hili pendekezo lao lingine litatekelezwa na hata kutumika kama msingi wa kuwa na Serikali ya Mpito kuelekea uchaguzi wa mwaka 2020:

"Kuundwe Tume ya Ukweli na Upatanishi (Truth and Reconcilliation Commission) kama ile ya Afrika Kusini ili watu waondoleane kinyongo kwa yale yaliyopita nyuma na waanze ukurusa mpya wa ushirikiano na upendo katika jamii. Katika muundo wake, Mwenyekiti na Katibu wa Tume wasiwe wanachama wa Chama chochote, Wawe ni watu wenye sifa za kitaalamu, wenye wasta na uadilifu wanaokubalika na pande zote zinazopingana katika jamii."

 Rohoni tujiulize: Je, kitu kitukufu ni kitakatifu, hivyo, hakiwezi kubadilishwa muundo wake na maana yake ili kiendane na wakati hata inapobidi kufanya hivyo haraka ili kunusuru roho za watu? 

Karibu kwenye ulingo wa kutafakari kuhusu tunapotoka,tulipo,tuendako na namna ambavyo tutafika huko tuendako/Welcome to a platform for reflecting on where we are coming from, where we are, where we are going and how we will get there

  © Blogger templates 'Neuronic' by 2008

Back to TOP