Along this city's well-traveled Talstrasse last week, almost every corner had a large red and blue billboard. `Vote Without Fear,' the signs instructed passing Namibians. Signs on neighborhing streets informed passersby, `Your Vote Is Your Secret.'
Erected by the South African administrator general, who with the United Nations is responsible for the maintenance of Namibia through independence, the signs were designed to calm the fears of Namibian voters as they elected a constituent assembly. In the balloting, the first major step toward independence, the Marxist South West African People's Organization won most of the votes, about 75%, according to unofficial figures. But SWAPO fell short of the two-thirds majority it was predicting and thus was denied total power to write a new constitution.
This is despite the fact that to Namibians, who have been ruled by South Africa since 1915, democracy is a foreign concept. The administrator general and the U.N. Transitional Assistance Group, or UNTAG, had been busy correcting widespread misconceptions about election rules. The unfamiliarity with the voting process, combined with Namibia's 60% illiteracy rate, opened the door for intimidation and deception tactics by many of Namibia's political parties.
For instance, some Namibians were led to believe that political parties would be informed about how their votes were cast and that there would be retribution if they voted for a rival party. Several SWAPO leaders went so far as to threaten that if SWAPO failed to gain 50% of the vote, they might renew the guerrilla war SWAPO has waged for 23 years. This tactic may have been perhaps the most intimidating of all, because it turned the election into a referendum on the war.
Stories abound of political parties spreading deliberate disinformation about the voting. During the campaign, SWAPO reportedly told many Namibians to `put a big `X' on the SWAPO ballot if you support SWAPO, but if you are against us, put a small `x' on the SWAPO ballot.'
Like other African independence elections, Namibia's constituent-assembly elections may have been its last. Though SWAPO now contends that it is prepared, if necessary, to work with other parties to develop a coalition government, it has strong totalitarian inclinations, and fear is widespread that a SWAPO-dominated government would lead Namibia into one-party rule.
There is concern that SWAPO will not respect rival opinions in the prospective coalition, and may use the constituent assembly as a stepping stone to total control in Namibia, similar to the approach used by the Marxist-Leninist factor of the Sandinistas following the overthrow of Anastasio Somoza in Nicaragua. Werner Neef, an adviser to the Christian Democratic Action Party, says that the CDA will not join a coalition with SWAPO.
The SWAPO victory could lead to ethnic-based violence. SWAPO's power base is rooted in Namibia's largest tribe, the northern-based Ovambos. Indeed, SWAPO lost Namibia outside of Ovambo territory to the free-market Democratic Turnhalle Alliance, winning overall only because it defeated the Alliance by 197,000 votes to 9,200 in the northern region of Ovambo.
There are fears that an Ovambo-based SWAPO government might persecute other tribes such as the Hereros, Namas and Bushmen. SWAPO has admitted keeping many non-Ovambos in underground pits in its camps in Angola and Zambia and torturing them as `spies.'
SWAPO's win also raises security concerns. Since 1964, SWAPO has received financial and military support from the Soviet Union, and SWAPO leader Sam Nujoma has boasted of his strong alliance with Cuba's Fidel Castro, SWAPO also enjoys close relations with the African National Congress, which sent SWAPO 300 minibuses to assist in getting SWAPO supporters to the polls.
There is deep concern that the SWAPO-dominated government may attempt to model Namibia after its northern neighbor, Angola, by bringing in Cuban troops and Soviet military advisers. There is even deeper concern that SWAPO may cooperate with the Angolan regime in launching military attacks against Jonas Savimbi's National Union for the Total Independence of Angola, which is based in southern Angola. However, South Africa's proximity and may force SWAPO military restraint.
SWAPO's ecomomic vision is no more promising, but its traditional Marxist-Leninist rhetoric moderated considerably during the campaign. SWAPO told foreign investors recently that is does not support wholesale nationalization, and Mr. Nujoma has said that he does not wish the country's 70,000 whites to flee since their technical and management skills are needed. But according to Mishake Muyongo of the Democratic Turnhalle Alliance, which got 29% of the votes. `SWAPO will say in public `We want whites here,' but then in private they will turn around and say `Get rid of these people.' '
For southern Africa, the outcome of Namibia's independence process will be critical for the strategic and economic composition of the region. With Namibia's mineral wealth and abundant land (the country is twice the size of France), a moderate, free-market approach by the country's new government could lead to strong economic growth, perhaps making Namibia a regional success story among the underdeveloped front-line states. Conversely, a statist, authoritarian approach by Namibia will likely sway the regional political and economic balance in the other direction.
The outcome is equally important for the U.N., which, as the monitor of Namibia's independence process, has embarked on one of its most ambitious missions to date. More than 6,200 members of UNTAG are in the country to oversee the process, and the U.N. brought in more than 1,000 additional personnel to serve as official election observers.
Having funded SWAPO, given it observer status in New York, and recognized it as `the sole, authentic representative of the Namibian people' in General Assembly resolutions, the U.N.'s capability for objectivity is in justifiable doubt. Indeed, several Namibian political parties contend that the U.N.'s longstanding finanical and diplomatic support for SWAPO tipped the scale in SWAPO that is now taking issue with the U.N.'s formal declaration after the polls closed that the five-days elections were `free and fair.'
But perhaps the greatest irony of the Namibian independence process is the composition of the member nations represented in UNTAG. Nondemocratic nations such as Cuba, Libya, Romania, East Germany and the U.S.S.R. have been sent to Namibia to oversee democratic procedures that they forbid in their own countries.
For Namibians, the concern is not merely that many of these countries have their own dubious agenda in southern Africa, but also that the political system of an independent Namibia may soon be shaped in their image.
Source: US Library of Congress
No comments:
Post a Comment