Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
25 October 2021 | Story Prof Motlatsi Thabane
Eswatini

Opinion article by Prof Motlatsi Thabane, Research Fellow, Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State

Eswatini (Swaziland) gained independence from Britain in September 1968. Under colonial rule, it was part of a triad of South African High Commission Territories with Botswana and Lesotho. The British started arrangements for granting independence to the three territories at around the same time, but Eswatini received its independence two years after the other two, which received their independence within the same week – Botswana on 30 September 1966, and Lesotho four days later on 4 October 1966.

Transition from colonial rule to independence
An important part of the explanation for the delay in Eswatini’s gaining of  independence was that there was no agreement between the British government and Paramount Chief (as he was styled under colonial rule) Sobhuza II on the one hand, or regarding a political system by which Eswatini would be ruled after gaining independence, on the other hand.

Under colonial rule, the institution of chieftainship in Lesotho had been greatly weakened by alcoholism among the senior chieftainship in particular, and chiefs had become deeply unpopular as a result of collaborating with colonial rulers in the oppression and exploitation of society. In Botswana, chiefs remained powerful and allowed for modernisation of the institution, including educating chiefs and the general population. Eswatini was different. From the beginning, the chieftainship remained strong, popular, deeply conservative, and the king succeeded in incorporating Swazi culture and traditional power structures, both of which he dominated, into the colonial system.   

As they left the High Commission Territories, the British wanted to leave – as they managed to do for Lesotho – independent Eswatini as a constitutional monarchy where power would be exercised by elected representatives of the people. In this, the British were supported by Eswatini’s small middle-class politicians and Eswatini’s small working class. For his part, driven by a seemingly sincerely-held totalitarian and paternalistic vision in which everything had to be done according to Swazi culture that put all power – ritual, political, spiritual, economic – in his hands in the negotiations, Sobhuza II wanted, and held out for a post-colonial political dispensation in which all power rested with him.

The fact that the British were opposed to this, caused a delay in Eswatini’s independence. What is important for modern Eswatini is that the king succeeded. An important concession he was forced to make was a constitutional provision allowing for multi-party democracy, and the right of the people to elect men and women of their choice to represent them in the country’s legislature. However, he countered and undermined even this constitutional provision by establishing his own political party to contest pre-independence elections.

A political theoretical examination of documents explaining the political system that King Sobhuza II wanted, would reveal a much more dangerous authoritarian rule than was, in fact established.

From King Sobhuza II to King Mswati III
In 1973, after independence, the monarch even removed the multi-party concession, suspended the Constitution, and issued a decree that gave him all the power in Eswatini society. This is the dispensation that King Mswati III inherited when he ascended the throne in 1986, following the death of his father in 1982. There must have been hope that the young king would liberalise politics and life in Eswatini. But these hopes have been dashed, because although there have been changes in the country’s constitutional arrangement since Sobhuza II’s death, it was largely cosmetic, and intended to make absolute monarchical rule less unappealing to the eye and ear – with phrases such as ‘monarchical democracy’ – and otherwise intended to entrench the king’s power even further.

From what King Sobhuza II left when he died in 1982, and throughout King Mswati III’s 35-year rule, the royal family have amassed enormous amounts of wealth. Means of amassing this wealth included what can best be described as the payment of tributes in the form of company shares, charged to companies that invest in Eswatini. In other countries, wealth such as this accrues to state coffers. The Eswatini state has established a fairly well-kept registration database for citizens and residents, which enhances tax collection.

Together with Lesotho and South Africa, Eswatini is counted among the top-ten most unequal societies in the world. Wealth distribution is heavily skewed in favour of a limited few among the traditional and modern elites. Poverty in the rural areas is estimated at 70%, and extreme poverty is estimated at 25%.

Politically, with the exception of a limited few among the ruling group, all social groups chafe under a most pervasive oppression. This oppression has been challenged, led by various organisations, particularly during King Mswati III’s reign. The state has reacted to all of these with unrestrained brutality not only intended to punish specific individuals and organisations, but also to secure the seemingly near-total acquiescence in much of society.

Explaining the current political unrest
According to sources, origins of the current unrest lie in the kingdom’s financial crisis, which has meant, for example, that the government is unable to pay public sector wages. Politically, the unrest is a result of the oppression described above. It is not spontaneous but has been building up over the years.

Where the current unrest will lead to, is unclear. Popular demands in the current protests vary and have oscillated between the establishment of a constitutional monarchy at the most moderate, and the stepping down of the king at the most radical. As always, it is possible that for some, the payment of wages would be considered adequate and sufficient response by the king; if this is done, such groups would be happy to have things continue as they have done before the uprising.

Possibilities exist for division within groups that want moderate change. The king’s hold on power is so all-encompassing and pervasive that he has at his disposal a choice of many meaningless concessions that he can make, which some moderates might consider enough to cease their participation in the protest. For those seeking more radical change, the abdication of the king’s is unlikely; groups seeking change along those lines might differ in their methods of achieving the goal, and in the length of time they are prepared to hold out for such a reform. The longer these demands go unfulfilled, the more likely damaging divisions may appear in this group.

Exit routes to current unrest?
As a 19th century revolutionary put it many years ago, the chances for change happening in societies such as Eswatini increase tremendously when beneficiaries of the existing socio-economic system themselves begin to question such a system. That is to say, when such beneficiaries realise that the distribution of power and wealth benefiting them need to change in order for them to survive as a privileged grouping. It is a difficult proposition with serious implications, and one which cannot be avoided when its time has come.

There are a few signs of this in Eswatini that cannot be dismissed on the grounds of quantity. However, the political system remains intact, with reporting on the uprising beginning to be dominated by statements claiming that the army has restored order.

We have to hope that the people of Eswatini will achieve change and the future they want, which they have been crying for over many years. Army and police brutality must stop. The www (internet) in the 21st century is a basic human right and must be restored.  

Solidarity and condolences
The world, AU, SADC, SACU member states, and all of us must stand in solidarity with the people of Eswatini. Our condolences, thoughts, and prayers go to wives, husbands, children, friends, and relatives of those killed in this brutality.

This article was written after the anti-monarchy demonstration in June and July 2021 which saw estimated nearly 69 losing their lives. Now unrest has flared-up spearheaded by students, civil servants and transport workers.

News Archive

Volksblad: Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture
2006-05-27

27 Mei 2006

Moshoeshoe het mense saamgebind
KONING MOSHOESHOE kon bewys dat verskeidenheid ’n bindende eienskap kan wees. Dit blyk ’n sleutelbeginsel van sy leierskap te wees – en dit is nie ’n maklike een om te begryp nie.

Jy bereik die grootste eenheid tussen onderskeidende entiteite waar jy relatief vrye ruimte aan hulle gee om hul eiesoortige kenmerke na vore te bring.

Dít blyk uit prof. Njabulo Ndebele se gedenklesing oor koning Moshoeshoe.
Lesotho; het; onder Moshoeshoe se leierskap mense van verskeie dele van die subkontinent gelok.
Dié mense het hierheen gevlug van die verwoesting wat as lifaqane bekend geword het toe Shaka sy koninkryk met militêre onderwerping verstewig het.

Ndebele het gesê daar is algemene ooreenkoms dat die oorloë wat hieruit gespruit het, die maatskaplike grondslae van talle samelewings in Suider-Afrika geskud het.

“Dit was in dié konteks dat Moshoeshoe leierskap getoon het.”
Prof. Frederick Fourie, rektor en visekanselier van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat (UV), het gesê die lesing vorm deel van ’n groter debat oor leierskapmodelle, veral die konsep van Afrika-leierskap, en die voortgesette diskoers oor nasiebou en versoening.

Die Moshoeshoe-projek is in 2004 aan die UV begin om met Suid-Afrika se eerste dekade van demokrasie saam te val.
Die projek was deel van die UV se eeufeesvieringe in 2004.
Met dié projek word geprobeer om ’n groot Afrika-leier te vereer en die UV se verbintenis tot transformasie te toon sodat ’n ware inklusiewe en nie-rassige universiteit geskep kan word.

“As die stigter van die Basoeto-nasie, word daar wyd erkenning aan koning Moshoeshoe vir sy buitengewone leierskapstyl gegee.

“Diplomasie, versoening en vreedsame naasbestaan is van die kenmerke van sy leierskap, soos getoon in sy pogings om verskillende groepe in een nasie te verenig,” sê Fourie.

KONING MOSHOESHOE, een van Afrika se eertydse groot leiers. Hy is meer as 130 jaar gelede dood. Foto: verskaf

Waarde van openbare spraak ‘nou bedreig’
AANDUIDINGS bestaan dat die waarde van openbare spraak wat hoog deur koning Moshoeshoe van Lesotho op prys gestel is, nou onder ernstige bedreiging kan wees.

Om dié rede dra hy die koning Moshoeshoe-gedenklesing op aan al dié mense in Suid-Afrika en elders wat die moed het om hul oorwoë mening uit te druk oor belangrike sake wat die samelewing in die gesig staar, het prof. Njabulo Ndebele, visekanselier van die Universiteit van Kaapstad, gesê.

Ndebele, wêreldbekende skrywer, het gesê dié lesing kom op ’n kritieke punt in Suid-Afrika se nuwe demokrasie.
Dié lesing, om die buitengewone nalatenskap van een van Afrika se groot leiers te eer, is eergisteraand op die kampus van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat (UV) gelewer en het ’n staande toejuiging deur ’n groot gehoor uitgelok.

Ndebele het gesê die mense wat hul menings uitdruk oor belangrike sake, kan rubriekskrywers, redakteurs, kommentators, alle soorte kunstenaars, akademici, koerantbriefskrywers, nie-gewelddadige optoggangers met plakkate en strokiesprentkunstenaars wees “wat ’n spieël voor ons oë sit”.

“Selfs wanneer hulle dit waag op heilige gebied, soos sommige strokiesprentkunstenaars onlangs gedoen het, herinner hulle ons net dat selfs die heilige misbruik kan word vir doeleindes wat min met heiligheid te doen het.

“Dit is hul manier om ons te help, dalk meer diepsinnig as wat ons besef, om daardie einste ruimte van heiligheid in ons lewe te bewaar.

“Hulle verdiep ons insigte deur ons begrip te verdiep.
“Dit is gepas om hul dapperheid te vier,” het Ndebele gesê.
“Hulle herinner ons dat leierskap nie al is wat ons doen wanneer ons in ’n sekere magsposisie geplaas is om ’n organisasie of ’n sekere instelling te stuur nie.”

Hy het gesê onder die mense wat gevier moet word, sluit hy nie dié in wat deur haatspraak ander aanhits om geweld te pleeg; teen; mense; wat hul andersdenkende menings lug nie.

“Dit is nie met dapperheid dat hulle aanhits nie, maar weens hul toevlug tot die narkotiese beskerming van die skare.”

Mense voel glo ál kwesbaarder
Vise-kanselier lewer Moshoeshoe-gedenklesing
’n TOENEMENDE aantal hoogs intelligente, sensitiewe en toegewyde Suid-Afrikaners oor die klas-, ras- en kulturele spektrum heen bely dat hulle – soos nog nooit tevore nie – onseker en kwesbaar voel sedert 1994.

Só het prof. Njabulo Ndebele, vise-kanselier van die Universiteit van Kaapstad, gesê in die Universiteit van die Vrystaat (UV) se eerste koning Moshoeshoe-gedenklesing.

Die onderwerp was Reflections on the leadership challenges in South Africa.
Wanneer ontembare optimiste beken hulle voel dinge is van stryk, versprei die naarheid van angs. “Dit moet iets te doen hê met ’n ophoping van gebeure wat die gevoel van dreigende inploffing oordra.”

’n Gevoel heers dat Suid-Afrika ’n baie komplekse samelewing het wat liewer eenvoudige, gesentraliseerde beheer voortbring in die hoop dat dienslewering dan beter en vinniger gedryf kan word. Die kompleksiteit van beheer word dan in ’n enkele struktuur van gesag gevestig, eerder as in die afgewentelde strukture soos wat in die Grondwet beoog word.

Dat die afgewentelde strukture nie hul grondwetlik-gedefinieerde rolle verwerklik nie, moenie toegeskryf word aan die mislukking van die beheermeganisme nie.

“Dit is te vroeg om te sê dat wat ons sedert 1994 bereik het, nie gewerk het nie,” het Ndebele gesê.
Dit lyk of ’n kombinasie van omstandighede tot die “gevoel van ontknoping” lei.
“Ek wil dit vermy om te sê: ‘Kyk na Khutsong’, asof u sal verstaan wat ek bedoel wanneer ek sê u moet na Khutsong kyk.”
Sulke kennis lei tot wanhoop, want dit roep ’n werklikheid op wat só oorweldigend is dat dit fatalisties kan wees.
Ndebele het gesê niks kon meer vreesaanjaend wees as toe ’n komplot van die Boeremag oopgevlek en sekere Boeremaglede aangekeer is nie.

Sekere Boeremaglede het van ’n maksimum-sekuriteit-tronk ontsnap. “Sover ek weet, is hulle nie weer gevang nie.
“Wat is gedoen om die gaping te oorbrug?” was een van sy vrae hieroor.
“Van só ’n belangrike saak weet die publiek nie baie nie. Die karige kommunikasie kan die gevaarlike boodskap uitdra dat óf niks gedoen word nie, óf die staat in dié saak misluk.”

Hy het gevra: “Hoekom het die kwessie van munisipale afbakening tot die situasie in Khutsong gelei? Dit lyk of die probleem voortgaan, sonder ’n oplossing in sig.”

’n Aantal soortgelyke, oënskynlik plaaslike rebellies het oor die land heen plaasgevind. “Is hier ’n patroon?”
Ndebele het na die onlangse verhoor van oud-adj.pres. Jacob Zuma, wat van verkragting aangekla was, verwys.
Dié drama blyk ver van oor te wees. Dit beloof “om ons almal sonder verligting te hou, in ’n toestand van angs”.
Die gemene draad van dié gebeure is die gevoel van ’n oneindige spiraal van probleme wat vertroue tap. Daar kan ’n sterk suggestie in al dié gebeure wees “dat ons dalk nooit sosiale samehang in Suid-Afrika gehad het nie...”

“Wat ons sekerlik oor dekades gehad het, is ’n mobiliserende visie. Kan dit wees dat die mobiliserende visie onder die gewig van die werklikheid en omvang van maatskaplike heropbouing kraak en dat die legitieme raamwerk om oor dié probleme te debatteer ineenstort?”

‘Swart mense staar hulself in die gesig’
DIE swart meerderheid staar homself nou in die gesig: dalk werklik vir die eerste keer sedert 1994.
Só het prof. Njabulo Ndebele gesê toe hy die koning Moshoeshoe-gedenklesing by die Universiteit van die Vrystaat in Bloemfontein gelewer het.

Hy het gesê dit lyk of Suid-Afrika ’n meganisme nodig het om selfvertroue te bou.
Deur dié meganisme “kan ons die situasie waarin ons is, erken, wat dit ook al is”.
“Ons het ’n meganisme nodig wat die verskillende posisies van die mededingers sal bevestig en hul eerlikheid sal bekragtig op ’n manier wat die publiek vertroue sal gee dat werklike oplossings moontlik is.”

Dit is dié soort “openheid wat nooit maklik kom nie”, wat lei tot deurbraak-oplossings.
Ndebele het gesê ’n komplekse demokrasie soos Suid-Afrika s’n kan nie oorleef met ’n enkele gesag nie.
Net veelvuldige owerhede binne ’n grondwetlike raamwerk “het ’n ware kans”.
“Kan ’n deel van die probleem wees dat ons nie in staat is om die idee van ‘opposisie’ te hanteer nie?
“Ons is verskrik dat enige van ons ‘die opposisie’ kan word.
“Dit is tyd dat ons die koms voorsien van ’n oomblik wanneer daar nie meer ’n enkele, oorweldigende, dominante politieke mag is soos wat nou die geval is nie.”

Ndebele het gesê: “Ek glo ons het dalk ’n oomblik bereik wat nie fundamenteel verskillend is nie van die ontnugterende, tóg hartversterkende nasiebourealiteite wat gelei het tot Kemptonpark in die vroeë jare negentig.”

“Die verskil tussen toe en nou is dat die swart meerderheid nie nou na wit landgenote oor die onderhandelingstafel kyk nie.

“Die swart meerderheid staar homself in die gesig: dalk werklik vir die eerste keer sedert 1994.”
Dit is weer “tyd vir visie”, het Ndebele gesê.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept