Mutumwa Mawere

In September 1997, I met the late Mr. Ronald "Butch" Everett Lewis (June 26, 1946 - July 23, 2011), an African American former boxing promoter and manager most famous for negotiating fights for Mohammed Ali, Mike Tyson, Joe Frazier, Michael and Leon Spinks.  One of his favourite sayings which will remain etched in my memory was, "prepare for peace in times of war".

His perspective based on Sun Tzu's The Art of War bugged me and when I attended his funeral on 1 August 2011, I began to reflect on the meaning of this profound insight.

As we look back on our own journey as Africans, we are compelled to reflect on the African contemporary condition and ask pertinent questions regarding the connection between the struggles to restore civil rights to all and the post-colonial experience.

If we take the perspective that informed Butch's actions and choices, we have to critically examine whether any thought was placed on the kind of civilization that would follow the post-conflict, post-colonial and post-apartheid era.

Regrettably, the post-colonial era has produced neither equality nor justice as expected.

We can blame the past for our condition but history has taught us that the future belongs only to those who choose to look at the stars in times of darkness.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating and we have had more than 55 years of independence in Africa to confirm if indeed the prosecutors of the war against racial and economic injustices had applied their minds to the kind of society they wanted to put in place to replace the colonial experience.

When the flag of independence was raised, we thought that the close relationship between Africans and poverty had ended and a new era would begin characterised by a new political and economic morality.

Has war ended in Africa?  With respect to the political economy, how far have we moved in reducing the frontiers of poverty and broadening and deepening democracy?

The language used in many post-colonial Africans states would suggest that the war has not ended even though the institutions of the state are under the control of representatives drawn from the majority.

Is it not ironic that most of our leaders hold the view that although they control state organs they are impotent to provide leadership on economic matters choosing to blame racism, colonialism and imperialism for the lack of progress in meeting the millennium development goals?

Surely, we must take responsibility for our own actions.  War should have been followed by peace and yet many Africans find themselves in continuous conflicts.

Who then should be blamed for the apparent lack of preparation for the post-independence period?  It is easy to blame politicians for the lack of transformation when we should look at ourselves in the mirror and ask the difficult questions that are normally reserved for citizens(politicians) that offer themselves to serve others.

When a war ends one expects a period of healing.  It is normally the obligation of the conqueror to provide leadership in times of peace yet in victory many Africans have failed to discharge the obligations expected of a victor.

All too often we complain even about the things that we can do something about.

Most of the governments created at independence reflected the choice of the majority and yet each year of independence that elapsed, the involvement of citizens in shaping and defining the character of their governments reduced and in some instances citizens were reduced to spectators.

In trying to put meaning to the causes of the African condition one is naturally compelled to address the attitude of the few that participated in liberation struggles.  Some believe that the fruits of the struggle must be reserved only for those that participated in the war.  This attitude has its own altitudinal implications in terms of lifting Africa up.

A battle is an event and war represents many battles fought.  Once the war has ended, peace and its fruits must and cannot be reserved for only a few.

While the majority pull their own wagons there are many in Africa who choose to act as office bearers in the state for the sole purpose of avoiding to add their voices and effort to the struggle for a better life for all.  It is easy to use the state to derive income that otherwise would not be available.  There are many who in Africa would be reduced to be destitute if the control of the state was in different hands.  Equally there are many who can withstand the vagaries of the market.

What the Libyan example has shown is that in as much as Brother Gaddafi was a vocal Pan-Africanist, his wagon had no room for non-family members and friends.  The situation is no different in other states where the political leadership and economic elites are exposed to a different standard of living from the ordinary citizen.

The post-war construction must be informed by the lessons of war.  If the struggle of yesterday was against humanly imposed prohibitions and constraints that impeded progress, then the post-war construction must allow for citizens to be free and make their own choices without the undue and unconstitutional influence of the generals of yesterday.

In peace, each living human being is a general in his or her own right.  The struggle to bring food to the table and more importantly to stay alive is prosecuted at the individual level.  Success is not inevitable but the harder one works the luckier one often becomes.

The war for prosperity and not the war against poverty require its own agenda for action.

How can Africa leverage its resources for success?  This question ought to have been asked during the war of liberation.  The transition from the colonial to the post-colonial era could have been handled better had enough thought been put on key foundational principles required to ensure that such transition was not a sham involving cosmetic or racial changes in respect of state actors.

Whereas yesterday, the oppressor had a white pigmentation, the new oppressor came from the womb of the struggle.

What I learned from Butch is never to trust any living human being with too much power especially if such power is borrowed from citizens through elections or stolen through unconstitutional power transfer mechanisms.

One mechanism that can promote freedom and prosperity is an investment in a system that has checks and balances for human beings are inherently nepotistic, corrupt, subjective, unpredictable and egotistic.

No system has managed to produce a human being that is immune from the limitations imposed by our makeup.  We all want to shine and dominate sometimes at the expense of progress and inclusion and in so doing we crowd out others who may have a better impact on the challenges of the day.

The generals of yesterday were too much preoccupied by the challenges of the war of independence that they often became victims of their triumph in the post-war period.

A triumphant general does not have to limit his thinking to the experiences of yesterday but must demonstrate through actions and words that he had thought about the peace during times of war.  Generals have the benefit of being remote from the frontline giving them enough time to think about what should happen when the storm is over.

No human benefit is gained from dwelling on the pain of battles.

It is only when we listen to the whispers of tomorrow and not focus on the ghosts of yesterday that we can truly know that the battles of yesterday were fought by principled, inspired and forward looking individuals.