Times Of Swaziland: SADC SAVED EMASWATI FROM CONFUSED DIALOGUE

SADC SAVED EMASWATI FROM CONFUSED DIALOGUE
================================================================================
Mfanukhona Nkambule on 16/11/2024 06:48:00


The Southern African Development Community (SADC) deserves commendation for its
astute handling of the political situation in Eswatini, evident in its recent
decision to remove the country from the Troika’s agenda.
This pragmatic resolution reflects the maturity of the regional body and
prevents a scenario where it would find itself compelled to issue apologies to
the people of Eswatini for having facilitated what could only be described as a
disordered and unproductive assembly under the guise of a dialogue. Had SADC
chosen to retain Eswatini on the agenda, it is likely that the outcomes would
have mirrored a chaotic and ineffective monkey’s tea-party, leading to
frustration and disillusionment among emaSwati.
Central to this perspective is the assertion that the Mass Democratic Movement
(MDM) has not demonstrated a readiness for engaging in meaningful and
constructive dialogue. The apparent disunity among its various parties further
complicates the potential for a successful and coherent discussion.This
disunity, coupled with a lack of a fundamental political question to steer the
dialogue, likely influenced SADC’s prudence to not pursue this matter within
the Troika framework.
The absence of harmony within the political landscape undeniably casts doubt on
the feasibility of any dialogue. With multiple factions within the MDM pulling
in different directions, it is challenging to establish a unified front or a
coherent set of objectives. The absence of consensus on core issues impairs the
ability of these political entities to present a clear and consolidated agenda,
resulting in perpetual discord. Moreover, this fragmented political scenario
renders it exceptionally difficult for SADC to ascertain the precise aspirations
and demands of the MDM.
Without a well-defined and fundamental political question to guide the
discourse, the efforts to facilitate a productive dialogue become futile. A
dialogue, by design, requires an articulation of specific issues and a shared
commitment towards addressing them. In the case of Eswatini, the nebulous nature
of the MDM’s objectives further exacerbates the complexity of establishing a
meaningful dialogue. In this context, SADC’s removal of Eswatini from the
Troika’s agenda emerges as a calculated decision, aimed at avoiding the
entangling of regional resources and efforts in an endeavour without a clear
direction.
The organisation has demonstrated foresight in recognising the innate challenges
posed by the current political climate within the MDM. It must be acknowledged
that for any dialogue to be fruitful, foundational cohesion and clarity of
purpose are imperative. It requires not only a willingness to engage in
discussions, but also a structured approach to tackle the existing
challenges.The current state of disunity does a disservice to the people of
Eswatini, who deserve a coherent and stable political framework that can
adequately represent their interests.
The road to a successful dialogue—should it ever materialise—necessitates a
clear delineation of objectives and demands by the MDM. Addressing the lack of a
unified stance and resolving internal conflicts would be the first step in
creating the conditions needed for a productive national discourse. It is
essential for the MDM to introspect and identify a central political question
that encapsulates their collective vision for Eswatini.
I find myself astounded by the inability of several prominent members of the MDM
to distinguish between democracy and democratisation, the latter being
fundamentally aimed at rendering democracy functional. While I am not at liberty
to expound extensively on this political theory, it is disheartening to
encounter assertions from some MDM members proposing that democracy ought to be
inextricably tied to precedence set by culture and tradition.
Norms
Undoubtedly, culture plays a pivotal role in shaping identity. Analysts contend
that it embodies the values and norms absorbed during socialisation within a
community, serving as a defining element of personal identity. Cultural
identity, I have come to understand, encompasses a deep-seated sense of
affiliation with a collective, integral to one’s self-conception and
self-perception. Culture is inherently adaptive, capable of self-regulation and
modernisation. As individuals mature within a communal setting, they naturally
discern which norms and values withstand the test of contemporary relevance.
Yet, when urging for a democracy that governs culture and tradition, we
paradoxically witness the emergence of animal rights masquerading as human
rights as the true definers of identity. Astonishing!
Political scientist Christopher Zambakari incisively argues that national
dialogues have become formidable tools for peace-building across Asia, Africa,
the Middle East and Latin America. However, in the context of Eswatini, it
appears that esteemed interlocutors from the MDM lack readiness for political
discourse that could propel the nation forward. Their grasp of basic political
principles seems tenuous at best. The University of Eswatini (UNESWA) should, in
part, be held accountable for this predicament, given its failure to establish a
comprehensive faculty dedicated to Political Science, International Relations,
and Diplomacy. Many emaSwati appear to regard politics as mere spectacle, akin
to what unfolds on their television screens, thus detaching themselves from the
complex reality at hand.
From my observation, it seems that many within the MDM equate politics with
oratory prowess. However, genuine political engagement demands more than just
speeches, riots, demonstrations and rallies. While visiting the bereaved
signifies moral integrity, it does not suffice as a remedy to entrenched
challenges on the ground. Politics is fundamentally about managing life; if one
cannot navigate their own affairs, they surely cannot be entrusted with those of
others. I have borne witness to such dynamics over the years. The current
fragmentation within the MDM is not unprecedented. Back in 2014, efforts to
convene an inclusive dialogue foundered. This initiative was spearheaded by Dr
Bakili Muluzi, the former President of Malawi, designated as the
Commonwealth’s special envoy to Eswatini.
Dr Muluzi arrived at a pivotal moment, amid growing clamours for political
reform. During his tenure, political parties and civil society exhibited a
willingness to negotiate a political settlement with His Majesty the King.
Consequently, a coalition known as the G15 was established, intending to secure
an audience with King Mswati III. However, the formation of the G15 precipitated
significant division, resulting in certain organisations choosing to withdraw
their membership. Concerns arose from the exclusion of two notable political
activists: Mario Masuku, the late former President of the People’s United
Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), and its 2nd Vice President, Peter Mphandlana
Shongwe.
Others omitted from the G15 included Wandile Dludlu, the former Coordinator of
the Swaziland United Democratic Front (SUDF) and current Deputy President of
PUDEMO, Quinton Dlamini, the former President of the Trade Unions Congress of
Swaziland (TUCOSWA), as well as Maxwell Masuku, then Secretary General of the
Swaziland National Youth Congress. Despite their claim of being the progenitors
of the G15, these individuals were conspicuously excluded.The rationale for
their exclusion, as well as the criteria for selecting G15 members, remained
undisclosed to the public. Nonetheless, optimism prevailed in anticipation of
the G15 meeting with King Mswati III upon his return from overseas engagements.
Regrettably, both the government and the King’s Office, along with the late
ex-Acting Governor of Ludzidzini Royal Residence, TV Mtetwa, denied any
awareness of prospective meetings or dialogues with the King. It bears
mentioning that the concept of such discussions originated from consultations
between political leaders and Dr Muluzi. Dr Muluzi initially conferred with the
King in a private meeting, the details of which were not divulged. However, the
Nyasa Times, a Malawian publication, reported that Dr Muluzi’s secretariat
confirmed dialogue with the King centred on democratic reforms.
Despite this, neither the government nor the King’s Office elaborated on the
meeting’s agenda, maintaining a shroud of confidentiality. The G15 comprised
seasoned politicians, civil society stalwarts and members of banned political
factions, yet they struggled to find common ground among themselves. If the G15
failed to reach consensus among itself, I am not surprised that current efforts
to hold the dialogue in 2023 and 2024 have also failed. There has never been
unity and one voice in the MDM and dialogue across political divide may not be
possible.
In his paper published by the London School of Economics, Nchongayi Christantus
Begealawuh, a PhD candidate at the School of International Development and
Global Studies, University of Ottawa, Canada, writes that a national dialogue is
a type of citizens’ assembly. I agree with him. Those who participate in the
dialogue must have the mandate of the people.
Persistence
Christantus says a lack of inclusion and adequate trust building measures is
limiting the potential of Cameroon’s national dialogue for peace. He says it
is a pattern that has been repeated time and again across Africa. He argues that
the persistence of conflict across Africa has fuelled the search for effective
conflict resolution mechanisms. Since a national dialogue is a type of citizens
assembly, it requires the assembly of a diverse range of stakeholders from
different sectors of society who meet with ‘clear procedures’ for open and
inclusive discussion on specific issues. In an ideal world, a well-organised
national dialogue can result in increased trust among the participants and a
shared vision for the country’s future. That cannot be the case with Eswatini.
There are no clear procedures and specific issues.
In 2013, the PhD scholar argues that Tunisia suffered a political crisis sparked
by a political assassination of a major politician. It resulted in the
resignation of the prime minister and the adoption of a new Constitution. These
assassinations are common in Africa. They are derailing progress.  In
conclusion, SADC’s judicious decision to step back underscores the necessity
of laying a robust groundwork before moving forward with political discussions.
It serves as a reminder to the MDM of the importance of unity and clarity in
their approach to dialogue.
Without these elements, any attempt at dialogue would indeed have been a futile
exercise, resulting in further entrenchment of existing political tensions
rather than their resolution.
Through this mature resolution, SADC has not only evaded potential
embarrassment, but also set a precedent for handling similar situations with
prudence and foresight in the future.