Times Of Swaziland: DEMOCRACY MUST ALIGN WITH CULTURE, TRADITION

DEMOCRACY MUST ALIGN WITH CULTURE, TRADITION
================================================================================
Mfanukhona Nkambule on 10/11/2024 08:46:00


Balancing tradition and political reforms is a critical challenge for many
societies attempting to preserve cultural heritage while modernising governance
structures to meet contemporary needs. The importance of this balance lies in
its potential to provide social stability, foster a sense of identity, and
enable economic and political advancement. Tradition serves as the foundation of
a society’s values, customs and collective memory, offering a sense of
continuity and belonging.
Political reforms, on the other hand, are necessary to address evolving social
issues, enhance governance, and ensure that political systems remain responsive
and effective. One major importance of balancing tradition and political reforms
is the prevention of societal polarisation. In societies where rapid reforms are
implemented without consideration of traditional values, resistance from those
who hold these values dearly can lead to social unrest. Conversely, adhering too
strongly to tradition without allowing for political change can result in
stagnation and hinder development. Therefore, striking a balance allows
societies to progress while maintaining social cohesion and honouring cultural
identities.
Furthermore, such a balance is crucial for effective governance. By
incorporating traditional norms and practices into modern political frameworks,
governments can garner greater legitimacy and public support. This can be seen
in legal systems that integrate customary laws with contemporary legal
standards, thus ensuring broader acceptance and compliance among diverse
populations. Several countries have demonstrated the ability to balance
tradition with political reforms successfully. One notable example is Japan. The
country has managed to blend its deep-rooted traditions with modernisation. I
will explain later.
It is common knowledge that Eswatini, a picturesque kingdom nestled in Southern
Africa, is a nation where deep-rooted traditions coalesce with modern
aspirations. Under the steadfast rule of His Majesty King Mswati III, Eswatini
maintains its status as a monarchy that believes that democracy must align with
tradition and culture. This small, landlocked country thrives on its rich
cultural heritage and traditional governance system, with some critics
complaining that this practice hampers democratic evolution.  I am alive to the
fact that voices advocating for political reforms in Eswatini are growing louder
as they emphasise the potential benefits of a multiparty democracy, akin to
systems found in Lesotho, Morocco and even the constitutional monarchies of
Europe.
Figures
I am seeking to explore the delicate balance between tradition and the possible
path towards democratic reform in Eswatini, acknowledging the roles played by
influential figures and the potential strategies they might employ to engage His
Majesty King Mswati III, emaSwati and customary bodies responsible for the
traditional governance system. I have already mentioned that Eswatini’s
governance system is an intricate tapestry interwoven with traditional and
modern strands. It operates under a dual framework where the monarchy coexists
with a government structure, characterised by traditional prime minister and
executive prime minister.
EmaSwati advocating for political reforms must understand why there is an
indvuna of the Ludzidzini Royal Residence who serves as the traditional prime
minister. This amalgamation reflects a desire to honour cultural mores while
addressing contemporary administrative needs. The proponents of reform point
towards the potential for increased political diversity through the introduction
of multiparty democracy. This approach, they argue, would not only align
Eswatini with its African and global neighbours but also enrich its governance
model by facilitating diverse representation and participation in national
discourse. Among those championing change include individuals with notable
profiles—Mlungisi Makhanya, Sicelo Mngomezulu, Velaphi Mamba and Mduduzi
‘Gawuzela’ Simelane—who have not yet strived to engage directly with His
Majesty the King.
Other emaSwati with notable profiles are Bishop Mpendulo Nkambule - my brother,
Mandla Hlatshwayo, Busi Dlamini, Barnes Dlamini, Gift Dlamini etc. I doubt His
Majesty would not have allowed a team of these liberal-minded individuals to pay
him a courtesy call on issues of national importance.  I will always maintain
and insist that these liberal-minded individuals should have, first and
foremost, recognised the transformative potential of engaging in constructive
dialogue with the King who represents emaSwati, reaching out to him through
Liqoqo and Ludzidzini Royal Council. Mlungisi Makhanya, a businessman and
religious leader, stands out with his adherence to cultural norms, setting up a
home in Malindza, Lubombo Region and assisting in church leadership in Mbabane.
About 10 years ago, I interviewed him after he had been ordained as a pastor. I
know him from Motshane High School. I had gone there in the early 90s to do a
story.
Makhanya’s understanding of cultural diplomacy, complemented by his
soft-spoken demeanour and business acumen, should have suggested to himself and
others a potential pathway for initiating dialogue with the monarchy. He would
have sat down with the King and customary bodies in discussion over the
country’s political destiny.  Now, I would be saying: “But, you didn’t
listen to Mlungisi or you didn’t allow him to have an audience with the
King.” Velaphi Mamba, a Harvard University graduate and member of the Mamba
clan that believes in the significance of kingship, bridges traditional
allegiance with modern education. His understanding of global democratic
principles, coupled with his rootedness in the culture of emaSwati, uniquely
position him to advocate for political reform while respecting the sanctity of
tradition.
Mduduzi ‘Gawuzela’ Simelane, a former Parliamentarian, could have leveraged
his political platform to foster dialogue for change. By not doing so, an
opportunity was missed to engage in meaningful discourse with the monarchy, a
lesson that underscores the importance of utilising existing institutions as
channels for reform-oriented dialogue.  Sicelo Mngomezulu, a successful Lawyer
and businessman in South Africa, embodies the potential of the Eswatini diaspora
to influence change. Having served in the Christian movement at the University
of Eswatini, Mngomezulu’s roots in the Kingdom and his deep understanding of
legal and cultural dynamics uniquely position him to advocate for political
reform in a manner that bakaNgwane could have given him an ear.
The South African legal system, known for its progressive stances on
constitutional matters, enhances Mngomezulu’s perspective on governance. As a
staunch Christian, he brings an ethical dimension to the conversation,
advocating for peaceful dialogue and constructive engagement with the monarchy.
I hate when we fool ourselves and not embrace the veracity that Eswatini’s
cultural ethos emphasises respect for authority and tradition. His Majesty King
Mswati III, as the custodian of both culture and constitutional authority, holds
a pivotal role in determining the trajectory of governance in the nation. The
liberals advocating for reform ought to have recognised that meaningful dialogue
is essential for aligning the monarchy’s leadership with changing political
expectations.
In navigating this path, proponents of reform must operate within the bounds of
cultural respect and constitutional provisions. Recognising the monarchy’s
constitutional privilege to safeguard Eswatini’s customs and leadership,
reformists are tasked with presenting their case in a manner that emphasises
mutual benefit. The prayer service held on November 2 , 2024, in KaMhlushwa,
South Africa, organised by the Swaziland Liberation Movement (SWALIMO) and other
political parties, drew an attendance exceeding 2 000 people.
However, the nation’s population stands at approximately 1.3 million. This
number indicates that the vast majority of emaSwati did not attend. This context
similarly applies to the Sibaya (People’s Parliament) gatherings, whose
attendance figures alone cannot accurately reflect the true desires and opinions
of the broader emaSwati populace. For Sibaya to genuinely capture these
sentiments, a Vusela (nationwide consultative exercise) process should be
sanctioned, facilitating comprehensive engagement with emaSwati at community and
tinkhundla levels.
While Sibaya serves as a platform intended to reflect the wishes of emaSwati,
the attendance at events such as the march to the USA Embassy in Ezulwini, the
large gathering at Mbabane Bus Rank around 2022, and the mentioned prayer
service, stand as significant counters to the conventional Sibaya numbers. These
participations underscore the necessity for more inclusive and representative
forums to truly understand and capture the nation’s perspectives. Indeed, more
needs to be done beyond what these existing platforms offer; they provide
valuable insights but remain inconclusive in delivering a full picture.  As a
result, neither Gawuzela nor those supporting the current political status quo
can confidently boast about these attendance numbers as definitive indicators of
the wishes of emaSwati. These figures, while useful, do not present the complete
story of what the people of Eswatini genuinely seek or desire for their future.
Religious
There are some historical and contemporary discussions around countries eroding
culture and later regretting or seeking cultural reforms. Let us look at Iran,
which underwent significant cultural and societal changes under the rule of
Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in the 20th century, particularly with the White
Revolution, which aimed at modernising and secularising the country.  However,
the 1979 Iranian Revolution led to a significant cultural shift back towards
more traditional and religious values. Some former leaders and supporters of the
Shah’s regime have expressed regret over the loss of certain aspects of
Iran’s pre-revolutionary cultural identity.
Another example is China, during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), wherein
traditional Chinese culture and heritage were heavily criticised and, in many
cases, destroyed under the leadership of Mao Zedong.  In later years, Chinese
leadership has placed an emphasis on reviving and preserving traditional culture
as part of national identity. In Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s reforms in
the early 20th century drastically transformed the country from an Islamic
Ottoman Empire to a secular nation-State.  While these efforts modernised the
country, there has been ongoing tension between secular and religious values in
Turkey. Some modern political movements and leaders have attempted to restore
certain traditional and religious elements within the Turkish societal
framework.
In Russia, President Vladimir Putin has often demonstrated a complex
relationship with the legacy of the Russian Tsars (Kings). Putin has shown an
interest in promoting Russian history and has occasionally expressed a certain
appreciation for the Russian Empire’s achievements and its historical leaders.
For instance, he has praised certain Tsars for their roles in expanding and
strengthening Russia. Putin has also been involved in efforts to restore and
preserve Russian heritage, which includes the era of the Tsars. This includes
various historical and cultural projects, as well as the reintroduction of some
historical symbols and traditions from the imperial era.
However, Putin’s attitude is also pragmatic — while he acknowledges the
importance of Russia’s past, including the Tsarist era, he tends to focus on
promoting a narrative that strengthens national unity and pride in Russia’s
history as a whole, encompassing both the Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union
periods. His references and policies often aim to bolster a sense of continuity
and stability in Russian governance. Overall, Putin’s perspective on the Tsars
is part of a broader strategy to cultivate a sense of Russian identity and
continuity through all its historical phases. Democracy must align with
tradition. Indeed, it must align with culture.