An Analysis Of Political Dishonesty And Intrigues Among The Eastern Africa Nations
It is now five decades since most of states in Africa were formed as a result of becoming independent in sovereignty from European political colonialism. They were formed with strong feelings of nationalism among the people and the freedom fighters.
There was common faith that the social and political problem of the then African societies was nothing else but colonialism, hence beyond colonialism everything was to be fine to the tune of a political paradebeispiel to the world and to itself. In contrast to this pre-independence utopia, political disillusionment, however, did not take long to be realized across the African continent. Africans are substantially disappointed by their political systems and socialization at home.
A condition that fuelled the outcome of Chinua Achebe’s famous book Troubles with Nigeria and also Oginga Odinga’s book, Not Yet Uhuru, as well as Nurudin Farah’s two books; the Naked Needle and secondly the Sour Milk. From all the above books in conjunction with empirical observation the charm cause of Africa’s political turbulence is inherent in the selfish power reservation mentality of the leadership across the time space of its five decades.
This paper thus intends to bring to the surface, evidence of the Machiavellian thought in political socializations of Africa by using cross sectional and historical studies of the experiences in the political socialization in eastern Africa since 1960 to 2015.
This paper is bench-marked on the earlier studies of Evidence of the Greek Thoughts in African politics by Ali A. Mazrui. Mazrui’s paper was presented as an inaugural lecture at Makerere University in the mid of the last century. Comparatively, this paper has been focused on the selfish political consciousness as expressed through political thoughts and actions of politicians in east Africa.
Machevellian description was adopted as a basis of charging the political actions. Selfish, malicious, prejudicial or actions of bigotry are deemed to be Machiavellian. This is derived from explanations of ideal political and power related moves by Nicholo Machiavelli in his books the Prince and the Discourses on Livy. Going by logic of extension Ali A. Mazrui in his book Cultural forces behind World Politics identified two types of Machiavellian thoughts in Africa’s political socialization.
One is political sadism and another one is political masochism. Political sadism is effecting of political selfishness to the members of another country, i.e. Machiavellianism at international level. while political masochism is using Machiavellian political intentions against one’s own country. This paper will analytically look at both political sadism and political masochism as two aspects of Machiavellian thought by confining itself to the East African space that is made of Southern Sudan, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, and Burundi since 1960 to 2015.
The conveniently earliest era time in which I can stage this paper is in the 17th century in Uganda, where there was a tussle for power between the two brothers Kabaka Junju Wandegeya and kabaka Semakookiro Wandegeya. They are both sons of Kabaka Kyabaggu Kabinuli. Junju was the Kabaka of Buganda Kingdom in the late 1700.He had four wives and three children; two daughters and one son. The traditions had it that leadership was a hereditary Monarchy. The person to inherit the throne was not supposed to be a first born son. However, any male and biological offspring from the blood lineage of the Kabaka. Kabaka Semakookiro was not yet the Kabaka by then, but only the prince, his brother Junju was the one that was the Kabaka.
Prince Semakookiro designed a crafty ploy to take his offspring to the throne by strategizing to have sex with last wife of Kabaka Junju. This wife was known as Tebwaaza, daughter of Kasamba, of the Mbogo (Water Buffalo) clan. On learning this, Kabaka Junju was annoyed. But without contrite prince Semakookiro vowed openly that he must have sex with Tebwaaza. It led to a feud then a fierce war between the militias of Junju and Semakookiro. Semakookiro was sure that he was wrong and he might even win the war, but he employed the first Machiavellian principle that borrow the neighbours weapons when you want to commit public evil but don’t use your own weapons.
He thus hired the Bakenya warriors to capture his brother Kabaka Junju, but instead Bakenya warriors killed Junju and confiscated the spiritual symbol of the monarchy, which was the drum. When Semakookiro heard of these events he pretended to be publicly annoyed by the brutal death of his brother .He then ordered his militia to fight Bakenya warriors. However, his primary objective was to recover the spiritual emblem of the Buganda kingdom, the drum and thence go ahead with the taking over of the throne.
Bakenya warriors were scared with the huge number of the militia of Semakookiro; they ran away cross the Essese islands, they maneuvered across the waters of Lake Victoria into the present day Rusinga Island. They ran away with the spiritual Monarchy; the drum of the Buganda kingdom. Thus the Buganda lost their scepter to the Bakenya.
Raila Odinga (2014) in his book, Flame of Freedom, projects that they are these Bakenya warriors who settled at Rusinga Island that are direct ancestors to Tom Mboya, an illustrious and very Machiavellian Kenya Politician. Political anthropologists in east Africa often link the rise of Mboya into Kenya political helmsman-ship to the spiritual influence of the Buganda Kingdom drum which the Bakenya ran away with. Mboya was consciously Machiavellian in his way of doing politics. His Machiavellian strategies destroyed Oginga Odinga’s ambitions. Both at the Luo community level and also at national level. Just as Nicollo Machiavelli explained cheating and derision as a tool in the game of power in the Prince, Mboya regardless of being half the age of Oginga Odinga, he was always derisive and shrewd in his manner of dealing with Oginga Odinga. This experience was later on shared by Oginga Odinga as an overtone of emotions in his 1967 book Not yet Uhuru.
When dealing with Jomo Kenyatta, Mboya forgot astuteness that has to come with power politics within a cultural framework of tribalism and ethinicity.Truely, he was crafty to an extend that Jomo Kenyatta’s relatives were un-easy and even Jomo Kenyatta himself was towered over by Mboya’s prowess in public assignment. Here Mboya was riding easy on superior intellect as displayed by his authorship of two powerful books, Challenges to Nationhood and speeches which discussed the imperative political agenda’s of the time.
Another book was Freedom and Beyond, a semi-autobiographical work that purposefully aimed to narrate Mboya’s role in Kenya liberation from colonial tyranny.Acutally the Machiavellian perspective here is that the prince obviously enjoys strong repute and strength when he publicly displays intellectual prowess and enterprise in duties.
This is what Mboya was exactly doing. Unfortunately, he had not internalized two other important philosophies that guide management of power; never outshine the master by Robert Greene as discussed in the book 48 Rules of Power; and in war prepare for peace and in peace prepare for war by Sun Tzu in his book the Art of War. Mboya openly outshone Jomo Kenyatta in terms of intellect, as at the same time he enjoyed a lot of peace he never comprehended under the political umbrella of Jomo Kenya. Mboya was shot on Nairobi Street, in the mid day in 1969, a political eventuality bringing out clearly a point that Machiavellianism as a science of politics must be applied in observation of other sciences.
I take you back to Uganda again my dear reader. Where we are to explore the socialization between Sir Edward Mutesa the first president of Uganda, Sir Milton Appolo Obote, the prime Minister and Id Amin Dada the military leader. The time of their socialization was between 1960 to 1975.The geographical space of their socialization was Uganda. Mutesa is an extension of the Kabaka Monarchy of Buganda. He became the president when Uganda became independent from the British colonialism in 1961.This means that when Uganda was set free from colonialism it only reverted back to Monarchical leadership but not republican democracy.
Presidency of Kabaka Edward Mutesa was a manifestation of these, though it was good to Buganda as a clan, it was not good to Uganda as a nation. Thus Edward Mutesa became the president through colonial villainy but through democratic national building; an open Machiavellian vice. Mutesa was a graduate of commerce from Makerere University. Obote his prime minister was a trained political scientist, however, he dropped out of the program when he was a third year student at Makerere University. How he become Dr. Milton Obote is a story of another day.Idi Amin Dada was not educated, he only had Islamic Madrasa education and a lot of experience as a military officer, and he was also gifted with a huge body. Mutesa did not understand the politics as a science being purely a protégé of Machiavellian thought.
He did not have good arms, good friends, mercenaries or auxiliaries. Unfortunate enough his thoughts were not about weakening the enemy, whether actual or imaginary, but substantially thought about leisure and cosmetic dignity the vicious virtues that must have been inherited from the monarchical culture of the Buganda Kingdom. Mutesa was dethroned from power after a short stint by Obote through a coup d’état. He ran to England for his safety, but was later-on killed by drinking beer laced with poison, he it took while in a company of some Ugandan ladies in England. Political Analysts pointed out that the ladies were intelligence officers assigned by Obote.
This could be nothing else other than political sadism by Obote operating on a Machiavellian principle of using the resource of others to achieve public evil. The resource in this juncture was beauty of the ladies.They were all from western Uganda, brown and beautiful and able to speak fluent Luganda the language of Mutesa. These were the resources Obote did not have, as he could not speak Luganda and ladies from his Langi community are usually dark in complexion and slow in instinct, good as house wives but not flexible to participate in any sophisticated socialization.
Let us now turn to the political socialization Obote and Idi Amin Dada. He was smart and nice in applying the Machiavellian games. His awareness that Obote depended solely on his military prowess prompted him to a Machiavellian sense. It was a grieve mistake for Obote. That he was a prince without efficient knowledge of arms and how to manage military systems. Idi Amin ousted Obote out of power, violently. It was so shameful. Obote was out on an intellectual and ideological spree in Asia then he got news that military coup has taken place in Uganda, the international media announced that Obote must remain wherever he was but not to go back to Uganda.Lew Kwan Yew wrote, in his autobiography, From third World to First world, that by the time of the coup against Obote in Uganda, he was in the same meeting with Obote in Asia, the coup news was emotionally a stretching moment for Dr.Milton Obote.
Idi Amin soon met his size of Machiavellian challenge; even if he was an astute in maximizing his capacity as the prince by driving his subjects into extreme fear, he was not able to applying the Machiavellian law of politics and power which states that the prince will easily be despised if at all he goes rapacious, fat and usurps the women of his subjects. Amin’s life in politics was a full contradiction to this law. Sadder is that he did not fortify is principality by stockpiling good arms and courting good friends. He was an enemy to all leaders of the eastern African states of that time.
As if it was not enough; his choice of secretaries or ministers was an open impeachment to the Machiavellian art and science of power. He foolishly misused the secretaries by forcing them to serve his sentimental megalomania through false praises other than asking them to collect data that could have been useful in political intelligence for the good of his military principality. This Machiavellian mediocrity made Idi Amin a cheap squab for his enemies. He was chased out of power by the mercenaries and auxiliaries of his enemies. He had nowhere to hide other than in a village mosque in northern Sudan.
My dear reader let us have a look at Southern Sudan. It joined the eastern African state membership five years ago. It has had a long history of bloodshed fuelled by politics that has been a protégé of Machiavellian political consciousness among the leaders. How Sudan became the Arab Colony but not the British Colony is a funny story. It was in the mid of 1800, when Sudan was being competed for by the British and the Arabs. But the native Sudanese communities which included,Nuer,Dinka,Toboso and so many others preferred to live with the Arabs , but chase away the Britsh.
The reason for this was that the Arabs used to shout to the Sudanese Karibu ! Or welcome and join us food, any time a Sudanese appeared when the Arab families were having lunch or supper in the open. This was actually an Islamic value that had by then been internalized into Arab culture. But for the British they used to eat behind the closed doors, and in case a Sudanese appeared there was no word of hospitality. The British thus where judged not generous, they were chased away by the Native Sudanese and then the Arabs were requested to rule over Sudan till 2012 when the war that had been fought between the Arabs and the Sudanese was settled by dividing Sudan into Southern part for the native Africans and North for the arabs.All this was a diktak settlement for the people of southern Sudan.
Dr. Garang died in the struggle for liberation of southern Sudan. He died in the hands of Yoweri Museven. It was Museven that was endowed with supplying the Mercenaries. Garang visited him in preparation for the soon coming independence of Southern Sudan. On his way back home, Garang crashed and died along with the crew in the government helicopter provided by the government of Uganda through advice of Museven. Museven disingenuously feigned ignorance.
This was political sadism of that day in its official Machiavellian duty of caressing the subjects but annihilating the competitors. Independence came with an inter-tribal memorandum of understanding among the people of southern Sudan which saw Salva Kiir becoming the president and Dr.Machar the vice.Machar had done more for the liberation process than Kiir. Kiir never honored the memorandum he proved a Machiavellian dissembler by dishonoring all the promises made in the memorandum.
In Kenya, the political space is an overt domain or theatre of Machiavelli. Since 1960, there is always political assassination in Kenya in every decade. Right away from Mboya, Gama Pinto, Josiah Kariuki, Robert Ouko, to John Kitui. All these have been Machiavellian overtones of politics. It began with Kenya finishing Odinga when it was Odinga who fought for Jomo Kenya to be the president, Moi inculcating fear in people to maximize his own greatness, Kibaki betraying the memorandum of understanding between and Raila Odinga, Odinga betraying Ruto and Uhuru caressing the subjects as he maximally annihilates the competitors.Machevelian vices of finishing the one who brought you to power, fortifying the principality through feigning and dissembling, impetuosity to fortune and instilling of fear have been substantially dominated the sphere of Kenya’s political civilization.
In fact Moi preferred to be feared than to be loved because he knew that to be loved comes with obligation and be feared is a source of ability to control the ruled. Moi is the noblest of the Machiavellian sons of Africa.Ngugi wa Thiong’o in his book Wizard of the Crow, describes the Machiavellian culture in Kenya political socialization as a cult of dictatorship.
Uganda under Museven has experienced all sorts of Machiavellian traps. Intimidation of the opposition, monkey wrenching of the education system and outright terrorizing of the people into silence through brutal acts like tear gassing the opposition leader Dr.Besigye to blind, as well as intensified police brutality and presence of the military on the streets brandishing the guns by president Museven is nothing other Machiavellian tactics of the power holder using fear as a strategy to press down the governed.
As it now Museven uses derision and Mockery as is campaign strategies of demeaning competitors for presidency in 2016; he describes the former Vice Chancellor of Makerere, professor Baryamureeba as a small boy who could manage as small school like Makerere University. Museven is probably to come out of power through violence.
This has been precipitated by his failure to observe a Machiavellian principle of visual presence being more important than the silent past. He always wants to remain in power because he fought the guerrilla war that brought security and political stability to Uganda. It will not work. The Machiavellian selfishness in the political socialization of Uganda under Museven is the mirror copy of the situation in Rwanda under Paul Kagame and Burundi under Nkurunziza.
In Tanzania Nyerere is the perfect specimen for Machiavellian science in the political laboratory of east Africa. He displayed prowess and enterprise nicely. A very beautiful Machiavellian score. He did this by being voluble in uniting Tanganyika and Zanzibar into a union of Tanzania. Volubility is a respected a Machiavellian tool. It is a virtue in fact.
Nyerere was also a great feigner of catholic faith, a vignette of mercy and sympathy, the tributes indentified in Machiavellian science as the main source of reputation for the prince and fortification of the principality. He was also able to be the opposite of mercy, especially when criticized. This transpired openly in the socialization between him and the Tanzanian Marxist called Babu. Nyerere came up with villagization ideology and cultural reservation in terms of Kiswahili as the only language of the people of Tanzania.
These two moves by Nyerere made Tanzanians cheap to rule. Nyerere himself was and still is the best African when it comes to use of spoken and written English. He had more strength in pragmatic civilization and acculturation into English and other European cultures. He towers above Ali A. Mazrui. He was an excellent student of Shakespeare, philosophy and rhetorics.Why he wanted people in Tanzania to be held in a ideological cocoon of ujamaa or villagization and linguistic kernel of Kiswahili is an indubitable question for Machiavellian experiment justifiably enjoying its station among the most worthies of the tricky and most dissembling of the African princes.