 |
|
 |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
Africa Policy E-Journalgiven the difficulty in maintaining up-to-date links in old files. However, we hope they may still provide leads for your research. Southern Africa: US Legislators Visit Date Distributed (ymd): 951012 Excerpts From The Report of The Africa Fund Delegation of U.S. State Legislators to South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe, May 1995 Published July 1995 Executive Summary In May 1995 The Africa Fund organized a visit by three state legislators to South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe. This delegation visit was part of a project made possible by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, to promote the involvement of U.S. state and municipal officials with U.S. policy towards southern Africa. State and municipal elected officials in the United States played a critical role in influencing U.S. foreign policy toward apartheid South Africa in the 1980s. Many worked closely with the Africa Fund, frequently turning to it for information and analysis. In the aftermath of South African liberation, leading legislators wanted to maintain their involvement but recognized the need to become familiar with the new issues facing the wider southern Africa region. The Delegation We were privileged to have a team of three distinguished state legislators in this first delegation. Representative Arthur Hamilton of Arizona, Representative Irma Hunter Brown of Arkansas and Senator Virgil Clark Smith of Michigan have over fifty-four years of legislative experience between them, a period far longer than the nations they visited have lived in freedom. Dumisani Kumalo, Projects Director of The Africa Fund, accompanied the delegation. In each country visited, the delegation sought to gain an in-depth understanding of the current situation, assessing the changes taking place. They planned to initiate strong contacts with local legislators and exchange legislative experiences and knowledge about drafting laws, constructing budgets and raising revenues. In addition to meeting many individuals, the delegation participated in a number of specially organized regional working forums with legislators in several centers in each country, making formal presentations and engaging in extended dialogue with their counterparts. The Countries The Africa Fund delegation chose to visit three countries as a means of widening the near total American focus on South Africa to encompass the broader region. Together, South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe reflect the diversity of southern Africa's experience with freedom. South Africa has only been free for a year. Namibia, long illegally occupied by South Africa as a colony, won its independence in 1990. Zimbabwe achieved liberation fifteen years ago. Common Problems - Challenges Being Met Even more striking than their differences are the continuing, severe common problems produced by many decades of apartheid, colonial and white minority rule which the delegation observed, in varying degrees, in all three countries visited. Delegation members were struck by the overwhelming disparity between the haves and have-nots, with the pattern, throughout the region, of continuing white wealth and Black poverty. Fifteen years after independence, Senator Smith points out, almost 70 percent of Zimbabwe's Black population lives in rural areas and is mainly engaged in subsistence agriculture, while most commercial agriculture is still controlled by whites. Delegation member welcomed the commitment to democracy they found throughout the region, and were impressed by the determination of local legislators to strengthen their capacity to act effectively on behalf of their constituencies. But they warn that the almost complete lack of economic resources, and thus the inability of either central or local government to deliver even such basic needs as adequate schools, sewage and running water poses a serious threat to the building of peaceful, stable democratic societies. As Art Hamilton says of South Africa, at the beginning of his report, "There is a perception in the United States that Mandela is President, the majority rules and democracy is secure. A nice thought but not the truth." The delegation was frequently asked to discuss issues relating to affirmative action -- which is broadly used to mean overcoming all the inequities, of wealth, education, skills, access to employment, that still characterize daily living for most members of the Black majority in all three countries visited. People long discriminated against, particularly in South Africa, but across the region, are understandably impatient for radical improvements in their lives. They want better jobs, homes and opportunities. The delegation observed that these reasonable desires, unmet, may lead to a loss of confidence in the democratic process. In some ways legitimacy of government is pitted in a race with popular expectations and it will be very important for the people to win some prizes. In South Africa the delegation was impressed by the idea of the government of national unity and the thrust for reconciliation. But they report frequent signs, in all three countries, of a continued reluctance on the part of the economically privileged white minority to share resources in ways that would most swiftly address Black dispossession. Across the region the delegation found an eagerness for open discussion, particularly about ways in which democratic participation, popular, local and at national level, could be strengthened and economic progress encouraged. The delegation also found an eagerness for greater connection and contact with the U.S. Members have made several individual observations about ways this might be achieved and the mutual benefits that such links could generate. At the same time the delegation underscored the importance of responding to the agenda's being set within each country: As Art Hamilton comments, "The people we met ... want our help, our assistance and our guidance. But they clearly do not want to be dictated to, or told the best way to do things...." Without in any way wishing to prescribe for the countries they visited the delegation felt that the youngest democracy might in some ways be able to benefit from observing the Namibian and Zimbabwean experiences. The individual delegation reports stress the importance of perspectives provided by direct contact and communication. Delegation members felt such contact could be usefully expanded. As Irma Hunter Brown comments on her experience: "It is my ... hope that the dialogue ... will develop into long term relationships. I think much can be learned and much can be shared which can benefit us all." The delegation was excited by the widespread mood of optimism, the willingness to experiment, the enthusiasm they found among most of the elected officials and community leaders they met. Challenges are being met. They see the region as a potential anchor for democracy in Africa with a potential for great economic growth. In this context they urge greater U.S. public and private engagement and investment. In Art Hamilton's words, "We now have an opportunity to help secure democracy in a part of the world that colonial rule made a powder keg. With the rapid growth of the African nations a relatively small investment now will pay huge dividends down the road. This is good government policy and good business." South Africa The delegation met with members of Nelson Mandela's government of national unity elected in South Africa's first democratic elections in April 1994 and held working forums with members of five of the nine provincial parliaments. In addition to meetings with leading public officials at the national, provincial and city levels, representing all the leading political parties, the delegation also had extensive discussions with representatives from important sectors of civil society, including the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), the Black business community, the South African Council of Churches and the Women's Development Foundation. In addition to the their overall observations set out above, the delegation was impressed by the importance accorded at all levels to the government's Reconstruction and Development Program, which seeks to address the legacy of apartheid through long term comprehensive economic development. The delegation considered that this program provides important priority-setting capabilities. Housing construction and job creation are current key development areas. Many legislators expressed concern over proposals to cut U.S. assistance to Africa. There is near universal concern with the need to initiate economic growth and considerable enthusiasm for encouraging U.S. investment. Other concerns frequently raised were how to assure effective affirmative action in favor of the Black majority in all spheres of social, economic and political life, and how to ensure broad democratic participation in government. As Dumisani Kumalo reports, one of the current hotly debated issues in South Africa is how power will be shared between the central government and the provinces. Namibia Namibia, after five years of independence, has well defined democratic, national, regional and local government structures, and a feeling of great promise. But the delegation was also struck by extreme difficulties facing the major part of the population, living in considerable rural isolation in the north. The delegation also noted still visible scars of the recent war for liberation. In addition to meetings in the capital, Windhoek, the delegation traveled to the far north and the Atlantic coast to hold working forums with representatives from several of the most remote of Namibia's 13 elected regional councils. Major concerns included how, with very limited resources, to effectively direct government services towards those who need them the most. Local leaders described tensions with white tax payers who resent their tax money being spent on people in the Black townships. President Nujoma summed up his country's priorities for the delegation. "We get concerned when some people in the United States are calling for cutting aid to Africa. American aid is not just money to us. It is ammunition for the toughest fight we are involved in: the fight against poverty and ignorance.... We must do something and we need the United States to continue to be on our side." Zimbabwe Zimbabwe gained its independence in 1980 and has been grappling impressively with the problems of nation building, economic reconstruction and democratization for 15 years. Yet the delegation observed that this still seemed to be a society actively seeking to define and redefine the nature of its society and the structure of its institutions. As described by Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, Mr. Emmerson Mnangagwa, Zimbabwe "began as a socialist government. But now we are changing towards a democratic, market oriented system...." The delegation met with the Speaker of Parliament, government ministers, Members of Parliament, regional and municipal elected officials. It traveled across the country, west of the capital, Harare, to Mashonaland West and the Victoria Falls. It participated in a legislative forum with the Chinhoyi Regional Council and also met with Zimbabwe's leading human rights organization. Zimbabwean elected officials frequently raised questions relating to strengthening democratic procedures at local level.They were eager to increase active participation in the democratic process and were interested in suggestions as to how to improve communication with constituents and networking with counterparts. They were profoundly concerned that Zimbabwe should achieve a level of sustainable development sufficient to improve the lives of the people. They saw this as complicated by World Bank and International Monetary Fund polices that are compelling the government to redirect resources away from social services to encourage growth in sectors of the economy such as export industries. Recommendations: The main recommendations of the three delegation members, set out in their individual reports, reflect similar conclusions and can be summarized as follows: 1. U.S. policy should be aimed at helping the governments and people of southern Africa preserve and extend their hard won democracy. Democracy in southern Africa is still fragile. The delegation recognizes that achieving the goals southern Africans desire, establishing a popular culture of peaceful, participatory democracy, with transparency of process and effective mechanisms for constructive criticism, will take time. Its achievement will have valuable consequences for both the U.S. and Africa, and deserves the fullest possible U.S. support. 2. U.S. policy makers should assist the countries of southern Africa address the basic needs of their citizens. This means supporting long term economic growth as well as social programs to heal the wounds of apartheid and colonial rule. The extreme disparity between the haves and have-nots threatens the progress of the new democracies. The delegation urges a long term U.S. commitment involving not only financial assistance but also talent and expertise. 3. U.S. aid to southern Africa should be increased, or at a minimum maintained at the present level. This is both in the U.S. national interest and in the interest of southern Africa. Aid must be given on the basis of the southern African agenda rather than one imposed from Washington. The aid program should support and sustain development strategies defined by the people of the region. The U.S. should ensure that its assistance policies are socially as well as economically responsible and target the poorest of the poor rather than those who are already advantaged. 4. The delegation urges evaluation and monitoring of the effectiveness of assistance programs. 5. The delegation strongly encourages U.S. legislators to work with the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Black Caucus of State Legislators and The Africa Fund, to swiftly expand legislative exchanges, build direct links and share experiences and expertise which can help enhance legislative capacity in southern Africa. Continuing ties between legislators in the U.S. and their counterparts in southern Africa will help U.S. legislators effectively impact on national policy. 6. The delegation encourages increased trade and investment, which will be mutually beneficial to the U.S. and southern Africa. State legislators can help to identify products and resources within their own states that could be the basis for mutually beneficial trade. They should also encourage socially responsible investment by corporations from their home states. 7. The U.S. should develop a special relationship with South Africa over the next decade, because a successful transition in South Africa will benefit the entire region. This relationship is rooted in ties that have been built over the last twenty years between the people of the United States and the people of South Africa. It would encompass expanded aid flows, closer political and social relations, and should include the early appointment of an African American Ambassador. A precedent for such a relationship can be found in the U.S. support for the countries that were parties to the Middle East peace process. Although this delegation was primarily concerned with meeting its counterparts at regional level, the great interest expressed by municipal leaders encourages the delegation to recommend that organizations such as the U.S. Conference of Mayors should undertake programs to strengthen municipal government, especially in South Africa where the first democratic municipal elections are scheduled for November 1995. ------------------ Excerpts from the Report of Arthur M. Hamilton, Arizona State Representative SOUTH AFRICA South Africa is a country trying to undo decades of apartheid without doing violence to either the new majority or the old ruling minority. Time and time again, we heard requests that things get immediately better for everyone. Trying to expand their economy fast enough to be all things to all people will not be possible. Trying to share the current economic pie with everyone while hurting no one will not be possible. Explaining these facts to all South Africans while making none of them unhappy will not be possible. .... There was considerable discussion of affirmative action programs. Much of the discussion we've endured in the U.S. on affirmative action is now besieging South Africa. While the government has changed, most of the bureaucracy that runs the country is still white. A decision to protect previous employment made this government of national unity possible. This protection has also made rebalancing the employment scales impossible in the short term. It is also clear that a lack of dramatic improvement in employment for Blacks and other discriminated against people will be equally unacceptable. .... I must add this: South Africa will need our willingness to be of help without our need to dictate. We must allow for South African solutions to South African problems. These ideas have a far better chance of working. Their success will be our payoff. The U.S. government should grant to South Africa the same special status that we've granted to a few other special states such as Israel and Egypt. In these cases we have decided that a special relationship exists that must be nurtured by special attention. The showplace for the success of democracy and racial harmony on the African continent must be South Africa. It must be held out as a living example of the power and opportunity democracy holds. With all of its "special advantages," if democracy fails in South Africa then the future is bleak for the African continent. It is in the interest of the United States and its allies for South Africa to succeed. .... Let me add that as a state legislator, I saw much that must be done to strengthen provincial and local governments. While it is clear South Africa does not desire our system of federalism, it is equally clear that provincial governments that are merely clones of the central government will not be satisfactory. Members of provincial and local governments expressed time and again their desire to experiment, to innovate, to fashion solutions to the unique problems of their area. The new constitution ought to allow for this. This allowance should include some money for the provincial governments with broad discretion as to how it's spent. (At the moment, provincial governments have no taxing authority and central funding allocations are made for specific purposes - education, hospitals, water, electricity, etc. - Ed) These provincial governments must also ultimately have some limited local taxing authority to accelerate solving local problems. Otherwise, people will come to believe that all solutions flow from Pretoria or Cape Town. ----------------- A complete copy of this report, including individual reports by each of the delegation, is available from The Africa Fund, 17 John Street, New York, NY 10038 USA (212) 962-1210 for $6.00 ($10.00 outside the U.S.) The delegation's trip and the report were made possible by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, although the views expressed in this report are the sole responsibility of the delegation and The Africa Fund. For more information about The Africa Fund and its programs to promote human rights and economic and social development in Africa please contact us at the address above or via email: AFRICAFUND@igc.org. copyright 1995 The Africa Fund
Documents previously distributed in the e-journal are
available on the Africa Action website: To be added to or dropped from the e-journal subscription list, write to e-journal@africaaction.org. For more information about reposted material, please contact directly the source mentioned in the posting.
|
|
Africa Policy E-Journal
