ELECTION 99
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
ELECTIONS '98
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

The hero as anachronism

Let us be honest about it, there appears to be need for some alternative method for informing the world of the passing of yesterday's men than the all revealing public media. Those living in today's world have not a clue about the achievements and non achievements of these defunct eminences. The obituary notices therefore raise more questions than they are able to answer.

The tiding of Julius Nyerere's death, announced last week, was full-fledged anachronism. Thirty or forty years ago names such as Nyerere's or Jomo Kenyatta's or Sekou Toures or Nelson Mandela's used to carry considerable weight. They were evocative of revolutionary uprising, across the African continent, against colonial exploitation, imperialists, out, out; in country after African country, resurgent masses broke out into revolt against British, French, Belgian, Portuguese colonisers in the aftermath of the Second World War. For more than two centuries, Africans were a squeezed lemon, slaves in their own land, treated more as beasts than as a normal branch of the human species.

Whatever the circumstances, history, however, continues to weave its annals, a time arrives when tolerance and forbearance on the part of the tortured and the downtrodden cease to be in country after country. True, there are variations in the theme. Jomo Kenyatta was the wild savage, itching to try out the art of guerilla-type warfare, Toure was the ideologue of post-colonial radicalism, Nkrumah was for widening the horizon of the ongoing freedom struggle in the continent and developing the closest of links with the Soviet Union and other socialist republics.

Julius Nyerere did not lack the grit of his neighbours. He was nonetheless a different kettle of fish, the quintessence of grace and sophistication. The valour of Africa cannot be vanquished, the freedom struggle must be pursued uninterruptedly in every country, the countries must learn to join hands in camaraderie. Unity is strength, strength is unity, the Africans, exploited beyond endurance for epochs on end, must keep fighting to preserve their newly earned freedom. And that is not the total story either. They were also committed to communicate to the world the wondrous message of kindness, culture and civilisation of the strain that is very much Africa's own.

Nyerere was a polite, elegant man. His Fabian ardour poured out as water springs out of a fountain. He was a proud African, he however also knew how to combine anti-imperialism with the richness of historicity, the century of the black African, his instinct told him, was no longer to be delayed.

Radicalism was an integral part of his nature. The long years in prison, the common point between him and the Mandelas, the Mugabes, the Nkrumahs and the rest of the African leadership, provided for each of them space for contemplation. Why man exploits other men is a question of morality and psychology. It is therefore pointless to give vent to torrents of emotional outpourings against the tormentors.

Hate imperalism, but do not carry any rancour toward those who belong to the exploiting groups and classes. The latter are perhaps as much victims of historicity as you, the hitherto tortured and down trodden lot are. Fight your battle for freedom, wear down the resistance of the colonial enemy, it is however as much your mission to persuade your erstwhile exploiters to realise the irrationality of imperial colonial subjugation.

This man Nyerere, was civilisation personified. His anti-imperialism was like forest fire; it burnt, it nonetheless did not hurt, at least it was not intended to hurt even the vilest adversity.

Such a pity that this goodwill was wasted, the imperialists were back into their heinous games the very moment they were compelled to grant formal independence to Tanganyika and Zanzibar, the two peoples who chose to come together under the umbrella of one independent republic. The conspiracy was on from Day One. Tanzania was not even permitted the privilege of a relatively tranquil post-colonial beginning. In this she was in the same boat as Keniya, Ghana, Zimbabwe and Guinea. Their common objective of ushering in an effective administrative framework came to a dead halt.

Two separate beliefs they professed constituted into an abiding conviction. The independence struggle was over, it was now necessary to reconstruct the economies of each country. These countries did not have the experience, they also lacked the resources called for accelerating economic growth. The to be or not to be dilemma; is there any harm in the given situation welcoming back the former colonials to help out the Africans in administrative affairs?

Credibility is a treacherous attribute, it let most of the African nations down. Under the gleeful superintendence of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the colonials returned as development advisors of various descriptions. They prevented the Nyereres and the Mugabes to coalesce in order to build self-reliant bridges reaching out to a prosperous golden future.

The non-aligned nations were of marginal help. The Nyereres, bewildered to the core, did not know which direction to turn. The South African and Zimbabwe cricket teams are gross instances of how the more it changes the more it remains the same. The colonials, back in full regalia, moved straight for the kill. A fair number of the heroes succumbed to the lure of graft and corruption. Frederick Forsyth's Dogs of War was not too far wrong in its depiction of how a multinational firm bought up an entire African country through bribing the titular leader.

By the time men like Nyerere discovered what was happening, it was already too late. Not that he and his comrades failed to discern where the malady lay, 'Since when has the International Monetary Fund become the International Ministry of Finance?' was his plaintive query. Such outspokeness was of no avail, he and his fight in comrades who had once led the victorious battles in Asia, Africa and Latin America against the imperalist exploiters were unable to again construct a viable resistance to the conspiracy that was at work.

By then, the Afro-Asian movement, too was a memory in the United Nations fora. The dearth of foreign exchange forced the countries to give into Western pressure. Nyerere chose to withdraw into silence. There was the flicker of one residual aspiration in the eighties when, still fascinated by the Afro-Asian vision, Nyerere agreed to take charge of the South Commission set up by the United Nations to implement co-ordinated development programmes for Third World nations.

The Commission was a non-starter from the very beginning; it could only write high-minded essays on how to bring about growth; following up the prescriptions by concrete administrative decisions was beyond the pale of United Nations capacity.

Nyerere duly became an anachronism, as did his pledge to stimulate amity and understanding amongst the Asian, African and Latin American nations. The notion of a collective entity to build a golden future for the Third World died a quiet death. Nyerere himself should have died at that hour. But such are the quirks of human existence; The spirit shrivels, the physical form nonetheless survives, the anguish of living deepens and deepens further. Thank goodness, that agony is now ended for Julius Nyerere.

Ashok Mitra