Nobody ever chose to be a slave

More than 200 years ago, in 1802, Haiti was in the grip of an intense military and political struggle that was waged by African slaves, to liberate themselves from French slave owners, and from French domination. Angered by the sustained struggle of the slaves, Napoleon said:

"Toussaint...this gilded African...I will not rest until I have torn the epaulettes off every nigger in the colonies...Toussaint L'Ouverture has chosen a course of action which is quite impossible and that which the Metropole considers most intolerable. At this time, they don't even wish to discuss the matter further, these black leaders, these ungrateful and rebellious Africans."

However neither Napoleon nor the French armies commanded among others by his brother-in-law, General Leclerc, could tear the epaulettes off the "ungrateful and rebellious Africans." The struggle in Haiti culminated in the proclamation on 1 January 1804, of Haiti as the first ever, independent Black Republic.

Unfortunately, the global celebrations in 2004 to mark the bicentenary of this historic event were much more subdued than the more recent celebrations, in 2007, to mark the bicentenary of the adoption in 1807, by the British Parliament, and the signing into law of the Abolition of Slave Trade Act, which, while not prohibiting slavery, made it illegal for British subjects and institutions to participate in the transportation of slaves.

However, it was important that the international community should commemorate this bicentenary as part of its response to the challenge to address the massive legacy of slavery and the contemporary forms of its manifestation.

PROPHETS AND REBELS

In the Introduction to his seminal 2005 book, "Bury the Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free an Empire's Slaves", the historian, Adam Hochschild, writes:

"At the end of the eighteenth century, well over three quarters of all people alive were in bondage of one kind or another, not the captivity of striped prison uniforms, but of various systems of slavery or serfdom. The age was a high point in the trade in which close to eighty thousand chained and shackled Africans were loaded onto slave ships and transported to the New World each year.

"In parts of the Americas, slaves far outnumbered free persons. The same was true in parts of Africa, and it was from these millions indigenous slaves that African chiefs and slave traders drew most of the men and women they sold to Europeans and Arabs sailing their ships along the continent's coasts. African slaves were spread throughout the Islamic world, and the Ottoman Empire enslaved other peoples as well...

"One measure of how much slavery pervaded the world of the eighteenth century is the traffic on the Atlantic Ocean...So rapidly were slaves worked to death, above all on the brutal sugar plantations in the Caribbean, that between 1660 and 1807, ships brought well over three times as many Africans across the ocean to British colonies as they did Europeans. And, of course, it was not just to British colonies that slaves were sent.

"From Senegal to Virginia, Sierra Leone to Charleston, the Niger delta to Cuba, Angola to Brazil, and on dozens upon dozens of crisscrossing paths taken by thousands of vessels, the Atlantic was a conveyor belt to early death in the fields of an immense swath of plantations that stretched from Baltimore to Rio de Janeiro and beyond."

About three weeks ago, on 25 March, the international community joined together to celebrate the bicentenary of the signing into law, at noon on 25 March 1807, by King George III of Great Britain, of the Abolition of Slave Trade Act. Adam Hochschild explains that the Act "banned British subjects, shipyards, outfitters, and insurers from participating in the slave trade to the colonies of France and its allies...(It) stopped all slave ships from leaving the world's major slave-trading nation after 1 May 1807, (and) gave hope to millions of people around the Atlantic."

In a letter to one Pavel Annenkov, in 1846, Karl Marx also wrote about the fundamental importance of slavery to the birth of the new, post-feudal world. He said:

"Direct slavery is as much the pivot upon which our present-day industrialism turns as are machinery, credit, etc. Without slavery there would be no cotton, without cotton there would be no modern industry. It is slavery which has given value to the colonies, it is the colonies which have created world trade, and world trade is the necessary condition for large-scale machine industry.

"Consequently, prior to the slave trade, the colonies sent very few products to the Old World, and did not noticeably change the face of the world. Slavery is therefore an economic category of paramount importance. Without slavery, North America, the most progressive nation, would he transformed into a patriarchal country. Only wipe North America off the map and you will get anarchy, the complete decay of trade and modern civilisation.

"But to do away with slavery would be to wipe America off the map. Being an economic category, slavery has existed in all nations since the beginning of the world. All that modern nations have achieved is to disguise slavery at home and import it openly into the New World."

INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY & REPARATIONS

Important as it was, in the ways indicated by Marx and Hochschild, ultimately the slavery they spoke of became a thing of the past. This came about as a result of the heroic struggles waged by the African slaves of Haiti, and their colleagues throughout the "New World". But this historic result was also accomplished because of the actions of people of conscience in the slave-owning countries, who felt it their duty to act in solidarity with the slaves who were laying down their lives to secure their emancipation.

In good measure, the book "Bury the Chains", is an outstanding tribute to these people of conscience, and especially those who raised the banner of anti-slavery in Great Britain, then the principal slave trader along the African Atlantic coast. These include Thomas Clarkson, John Newton, the freed slave Olaudah Equiano, Granville Sharp, James Stephen, and, of course, William Wilberforce.

Writing of these people of honour, Adam Hochschild says: "Their passion and optimism are still contagious and still relevant to our times, when, in so many parts of the world, equal rights for all men and women seem far distant.

"The movement they forged is a landmark for an additional reason. There is always something mysterious about human empathy, and when we feel it and when we don't. Its sudden upwelling at this particular moment caught everyone by surprise. Slaves and other subjugated people have rebelled throughout history, but the campaign in England was something never seen before: it was the first time a large number of people became outraged, and stayed outraged for many years, over someone else's rights. And most startling of all, the rights of people of another colour, on another continent.

"No one was more taken aback by this than Stephen Fuller, the London agent for Jamaica's planters, an absentee plantation owner himself and a central figure in the proslavery lobby. As tens of thousands of protesters signed petitions to Parliament, Fuller was amazed that these were 'stating no grievance or injury of any sort or kind, affecting the Petitioners themselves'. His bafflement is understandable. He was seeing something new in history."

The new thing Fuller saw was the inevitable growth, given the birth of the global capitalist market, of the phenomenon of international solidarity, which, later, gave birth to the powerful and global solidarity movement against apartheid. The Church of England and the Anglican Church internationally was an important activist in this anti-apartheid struggle, including its present head in his personal capacity, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Rt Rev Rowan Williams.

It therefore came as no surprise that, on the occasion of the celebration of the bicentenary of the adoption of the British Abolition of Slave Trade Act of 1807, Archbishop Williams raised a question considered difficult and contentious by some in the former slave-owning countries - the issue of reparations. In this regard, the Archbishop's office said: "The point about moral responsibility is that the slave trade yielded considerable profit for institutions - but how that is dealt with now means asking the wider question about how that heritage is used to help most effectively those suffering because of the legacy of slavery."

More specifically, the Archbishop of Canterbury raised the important issue whether the Church should not find ways and means by which to return to those who were enslaved the compensation it received when the slaves it owned were freed as a result of the adoption in Great Britain of the 1833 Abolition of Slavery Act. For his part, British Prime Minister Tony Blair expressed his profound sorrow and apology for British involvement in slavery.

In their 2002 Report to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, entitled "Abolishing Slavery and its Contemporary Forms", David Weissbrodt and Anti-Slavery International say with regard to the issue of reparations:

"While the Declaration (of the Durban 2001 UN World Conference against Racism - WCAR) acknowledges that the transatlantic slave trade and slavery were 'appalling tragedies' in history and are a source of racism and related intolerance, it states little in terms of express reparations for descendants of victims of slavery. The Declaration notes that 'some States have taken the initiative to apologise and have paid reparation, where appropriate, for grave and massive violations committed,' and it suggests that States find appropriate ways to restore the dignity of victims and calls on States to take measures to halt and reverse the lasting consequences of such practices. In addition, the Final Declaration urges States to ensure the right of victims to seek just and adequate reparation and satisfaction. In conclusion, the WCAR 'acknowledge[d] that slavery and the slave trade, including the transatlantic slave trade, were appalling tragedies in the history of humanity not only because of their abhorrent barbarism but also in terms of their magnitude, organised nature and especially their negation of the essence of the victims, and further acknowledge that slavery and the slave trade are a crime against humanity and should always have been so, especially the transatlantic slave trade, and are among the major sources and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and that Africans and people of African descent, Asians and people of Asian descent and indigenous peoples were victims of these acts and continue to be victims of their consequences.'"

In the light of these decisions, agreed by the international community in Durban in 2001, it is clear that Archbishop Rowan Williams was perfectly correct to raise the issue he put back on the global agenda - the need to find ways and means to address the persisting material and other consequences of slavery.

SLAVERY IN NEW CLOTHES

The challenge facing the international community in this regard is compounded by the fact that the contemporary global economy and society have given birth to various forms of economic activity affecting millions of human beings, that are akin to the loss of personal freedom experienced by the classical slaves. This suggests that the past historic victories against slavery succeeded to defeat and suppress slavery only for a limited period of time.

However, I believe that it will help us better to contend with the new reality if we consider what Karl Marx meant when he said - "All that modern nations have achieved is to disguise slavery at home and import it openly into the New World."

In the substance, he sought to make the point that, ineluctably, economic systems predicated on private gain will always seek ways to enslave the people who work for others, while accepting that employers might be obliged to pretend that their relationship with their employees is something other than one between a slave and a slave-owner.

Surely this must mean that within the context of our pursuit of the objective of a people-centred society, we must at all times remain vigilant to confront the tendency towards the enslavement of the working people, however disguised. To help us in this regard, there has emerged a large body of knowledge that seeks to define what are considered to be modern forms of slavery. In this regard the view has been presented that:

"Common characteristics distinguish slavery from other human rights violations. A slave is:

• forced to work - through mental or physical threat;
• owned or controlled by an 'employer', usually through mental or physical abuse or threatened abuse;
• dehumanised, treated as a commodity or bought and sold as 'property';
• physically constrained or has restrictions placed on his/her freedom of movement."

With regard to the foregoing, the point has been made that the following are the various types of slavery that exist today:

"Bonded labour (that) affects millions of people around the world. People become bonded labourers by taking or being tricked into taking a loan for as little as the cost of medicine for a sick child. To repay the debt, many are forced to work long hours, seven days a week, up to 365 days a year. They receive basic food and shelter as 'payment' for their work, but may never pay off the loan, which can be passed down for generations;

"Early and forced marriage (that) affects women and girls who are married without choice and are forced into lives of servitude often accompanied by physical violence;

"Forced labour (that) affects people who are illegally recruited by individuals, governments or political parties and forced to work - usually under threat of violence or other penalties;

"Slavery by descent (which) is where people are either born into a slave class or are from a 'group' that society views as suited to being used as slave labour;

"Trafficking (which) involves the transport and/or trade of people - women, children and men - from one area to another for the purpose of forcing them into slavery conditions; and,

"Worst forms of child labour (that) affects (according to the ILO), an estimated 126 million children around the world in work that is harmful to their health and welfare."

AN AFRICAN TRAGEDY - A LUTA CONTINUA!

In an earlier Letter in ANC TODAY Vol 5 No 40, we drew attention to the tragedy facing large numbers of Africans who, driven by dire poverty, daily risk their lives to reach Europe in search of even the meanest of jobs, provided these give them the means to avoid death by starvation.

This desperate flight from poverty in Africa creates the perfect circumstances for some in Europe to employ Africans (and others from Asia and Latin America), in conditions of disguised slavery. Surely the moment will once again come round when the newly enslaved will once more rise up to liberate themselves. Undoubtedly, once again there will be people of conscience within the developed world, who will join the newly enslaved in a concerted and sustained uprising that will, once more, constitute a landmark in the evolution of human society.

It is in this context that our movement and this journal join the rest of the world to celebrate the bicentenary of the adoption by the British Parliament, in 1807, of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act and its acceptance by King George III. We do this cognisant of the fact that this epoch-making outcome was the result of the historic victory of the African slaves in Haiti and the relentless solidarity struggle of progressive men and women in England.

Together, these comrades-in-arms created the possibility for modern society to address the challenging question of how the heritage represented by the progress achieved by those who benefited from open and old slavery, and those who benefit from disguised, contemporary slavery, should be used to help most effectively those suffering because of the legacy of slavery in all its forms.

When we opened the Durban UN World Conference against Racism on 31 August 2001, we said: "Our common humanity dictates that as we rose against apartheid racism, so must we combine to defeat the consequences of slavery, colonialism and racism which, to this day, continue to define the lives of billions of people who are brown and black, as lives of hopelessness.

"Nobody ever chose to be a slave, to be colonised, to be racially oppressed. The impulses of the time caused these crimes to be committed by human beings against others. Surely, the impulse of our own time says to all of us that we must do everything we can to free those who to this day suffer from racism, xenophobia and related intolerance because their forebears were enslaved, colonised and racially oppressed."

Policy Discussion Documents II

A governing strategy for the next decade

If the democratic movement is to confront the challenges of the next decade with confidence, it needs to use the preparations for, and deliberations at, the National Conference in December to build a broad consensus on its governing strategy.

The recently distributed policy dicussion document on legislature and governance therefore highlights a number of issues relevant to the organisation's approach to governance. These issues are neither comprehensive nor exhaustive. Other issues will arise during the discussions, arising from the ANC's practical experience of the first 13 years of democratic government.

Electoral system

South Africa currently has a proportional representation system at national and provincial level, where the voters cast their ballots for the political party of their choice for the National Assembly and provincial legislature. Each party receives a number of seats in the legislature in proportion to its share of the number of votes cast. These seats are filled from the party's candidate list. Presently each provincial legislature has one list. In the National Assembly there are two lists - 200 seats from a national list and 200 seats from provincial lists.

The question that is now being posed, is whether this system is still the best for the country. In addition to the proportional representation (PR) system, two other systems are being put forward for consideration:

• A pure constituency system, whereby parties and independents nominate candidates for each of 400 constituencies. The candidate who gets the most votes wins the seat. This is also called the first-past-the-post system. If there are many candidates, it is possible that the winning candidate could be supported by a minority of the voters.
• A mixed system, whereby some MPs come from a national PR list and some come from multi-member constituencies. For example, about 50 constituencies could be set up according to district and metro council boundaries. They would then be allocated a number of seats according to the number of voters. If a constituency has five seats and the ANC wins 60% of the vote, it will get three MPs for that area. Parties will get PR seats in the same way as in local elections, a top-up system to restore overall proportionality.

One of the main criterion by which to assess a system, is whether it deepens democracy and ensure the democratically-expressed will of the people is reflected.

In the PR system no votes are wasted or lost, and is most effective in capturing the will of the people. It ensures that the urban poor and rural voters participate fully and have a powerful impact on results. Minority parties also get fair representation in legislatures and can express their needs as part of the democratic process.

The constituency or first-past-the-post system is less democratic, since it is possible that a party can have a majority of seats in the legislature, and form a government, even though it received less than half the national vote. Constituencies where four parties are standing, can sometimes be won by getting only a third of the vote.

A mixed system is democratic because the PR list is used to restore overall proportionality. It does however create two classes of public representatives and small parties will be unlikely to have any constituency MPs. If a constituency has five members, a party would need 20% of the vote to get a seat. Constituencies could have between 3 and 20 MPs, with only large metro areas having up to 20 seats. If current broad voting trends continue, it is likely that only two parties will be able to nationally contest constituencies, with two others being successful only in KwaZulu Natal and Western Cape. This effectively means that most parties would not really participate in a constituency system and their voters would derive no benefit from it.

Another criterion is whether a system contributes to nation-building and political stability.

The present PR system enables parties to draw up representative lists that include all elements of their constituencies. It also accommodates even the smallest party in a parliamentary system since 0.25% of the vote will secure a seat. This accommodates some minority and possibly extremist political groups that could otherwise be a threat to stability.

A pure first-past-the-post system could undermine representivity. Going by the results of the 1994, 1999 and 2004 results, this could lead to the ANC having 80% of the MPs with the Democratic Alliance (DA) and Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) sharing the rest. All smaller parties could disappear or be limited to one or two seats.

A mixed system will have some of the benefits of the PR system, but these may be watered down by the constituency element where parties will have very few seats to allocate and will find it more difficult to have a representative list. The ANC could win a disproportionate number of constituency seats and will therefore have a smaller part of the PR list to use for balancing its own representation.

Another question is whether voters will feel effectively represented by the elected parliamentarians.

The strongest argument advanced against a pure PR system is that voters feel removed from their elected representatives and feel that they are not accountable to them. This ignores the fact that alternative systems do not in practice remedy the perceived problems.

In a pure constituency system there would be about one MP to 50,000 voters. Constituencies would be geographically vast and in provinces like the Northern Cape, which constitutes 30% of the country's land mass, only about eight MPs would be elected. Constituency candidates are still selected by and accountable to their parties. The belief that they will represent the interests of a vast and diverse population, with competing interests, rather than toe the party line, seems a little naïve.

The mixed system will allow for more direct identification between MPs and a geographic area. It may be a slight improvement on a pure PR system in terms of this criterion. But in reality most parties would not have any constituency MPs. If there are, for example, 200 constituency MPs, they would each relate to an average of 200, 000 voters. In diverse and divided constituencies there is the danger that strong and well-resourced interest groups can become more influential than the democratic process.

In terms of simplicity and voter understanding, the PR and pure constituency systems are both simple and familiar to voters. The mixed PR and multi-member constituency system is more complicated and may hinder the full-scale participation of illiterate and marginalised voters.

The PR system is the simplest to implement since only two ballots will be used in each province. The nomination system, disqualification of candidates, printing of ballot papers and results can easily be centrally coordinated. Remaining with this system will need no re-demarcation or changes to the electoral legislation or system. This will limit the preparation, training of officials and voter education that has to be done. Both the other systems would require extensive changes in law and procedures.

Modern parliaments are mostly directed by party positions rather than individual MPs views. Therefore political parties are the main vehicles for the representation of various interests. The trend is for voters to find a home in the ideology and policies of a particular party and to vote for the party or its candidate at all levels.

Evaluating floor crossing

Since the floor-crossing legislation came into effect in 2002, there have been two floor-crossing windows in national and provincial legislatures and in councils. This experience provides an opportunity to evaluate whether it is achieving its objectives and whether there are some aspects that require adjustment.

The legislation was put in place to address instances during the term of office of a legislature or council where there may be significant shifts in public opinion that do not warrant fresh elections, but which should be reflected in the composition of the legislature. Parties are able to change their names, split, or merge with other parties during the term of a legislature or council.

Three options are being put forward for consideration:

• maintain the status quo,
• retain floor crossing, but make some adjustments,
• abolish floor crossing.

The ANC may decide that the reasons that gave rise to the provision floor crossing remain and that the status quo should continue. This would mean that there would be two floor-crossing windows during the five year term of a legislature or council and that an elected representative could join another party and keep their seat, provided the requisite threshold had been reached.

In the light of opposition to floor crossing in the media and, opportunistically, from almost all other political parties, there will need to be a concerted effort to explain to ANC members and to the public the reasons for retaining floor crossing.

If floor crossing is retained with adjustments, consideration could be given to restrictions to minimise the formation of new parties with no electoral support base, perhaps by requiring such parties to comply with the standard requirements for the registration of a political party with the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC). Consideration could also be given to abolishing the 10% threshold as it favours the larger parties in the bigger legislatures, and causes practical problems when members of a party do not know if they make up the 10% of their party's representatives.

The third option, to abolish floor crossing would mean a return to the position before 2002. Members of a party who wish to join another party would have to resign from the legislature or council and it would be up to their new party to decide if a place should be found for them. If floor crossing is abolished, parties would not be able to merge or split in the event of a substantial reconsideration of their policies. They would also not be able to change the name of the party in the legislature until after the next election.

Role of provinces in our governance model

The period of negotiations in the 1990s defined the present form of government in non-ideal conditions. A decade of practice raises the question whether the current form of state is still appropriate to the conditions prevailing in South Africa today. The lessons of local government transformation, in particular, have raised questions about the organisation and performance of the other two spheres of government.

Provinces do not generally have the overall capacity to monitor and support municipalities. This has meant that national government has increasingly had to assume these responsibilities, through Project Consolidate and other initiatives. If actual service delivery is the measure of a sphere of government's worth then some provinces have not added much value in the last thirteen years.

Practice shows that national and provincial departments are generally too remote operationally, and often disconnected from the realities of community needs and local development, with long lines of communication between spheres of government, and overly complex planning and other decision-making processes.

Much has been achieved in the decade after democracy, and in the process important lessons have been learned about the overall delivery capability of public institutions. The central issue is what is the best way to organise and deploy on a massive scale the capacity of the developmental state to deliver the public goods and services that are needed to halve poverty and unemployment by 2014.

Of the three spheres of government, provincial government is the only sphere whose actual need and existence is still contested ten years after democracy. There are basically three options with respect to the future of the provincial system of government.

The first option is to retain the system as is. This has the advantage of continuity and stability, and the possibility to build on a decade of experience. But changes within the current framework would still be required to ensure the massive presence of the developmental state within community life. The strategic focus for reform would then be on unifying the public service and recruiting, training and deploying capacity to weaker municipalities. This would provide an opportunity to spatially 'de-concentrate' service delivery centres to community level. This in turn would mean a new role for districts and metros as key points for coordinating long term development.

It may also be necessary to progressively transfer certain national and provincial functions to municipalities once they have the capacity to perform those functions, and continuously improve intergovernmental coordination in areas like education, health, transport and social services.

The second option is to remove the provincial system altogether, leaving a two-sphere system of government of national and local government. This has the potential advantage of releasing significant resources and capacity for local government. However, national departments would still have to be spatially decentralised to regional level, new forms of coordination with local government would be required, legislation would have to be amended, and local government capacity would still have to be developed to take on new functions.

The third option is a hybrid, a three sphere system but with fewer provinces. Even if redrawing provincial boundaries was done this would still require a principled and conceptually clear understanding of what the role of the new provincial system would be and how it would differ from the current system. Having fewer provinces would still leave unanswered the question of what is the developmental role of provinces.

The resolutions that emerge from National Conference on these and other important matters of governance should provide enduring and useful guidance for the ANC as a whole, but in particular for those cadres that we deploy to government and legislatures to implement policy and develop tactical responses to a dynamic and constantly evolving society.

** This is the second in a series of articles summarising the main points covered in the policy discussion documents distributed as part of preparations for the ANC 52nd National Conference.

More Information:

• ANC Policy Discussion Documents, March 2007

SOMAFCO-X Trust

Building on a rich legacy of youth development

The SOMAFCO-X Trust, launched on Friday 6 April, is the brainchild of former students of Solomon Mahlangu Freedom College. The trust is "open to everyone who subscribes to its values and principles... chiefly promoting thought, leadership and youth development". It aims to facilitate integration and promote SOMAFCO's history.

The launch of the trust is indicative of the important role the Solomon Mahlangu Freedom College (SOMAFCO) played in the history of the ANC, and indeed of South Africa.

Between 1977 and 1992 the ANC established two unique settlements near Morogoro in Tanzania. The Government of Tanzania provided the ANC with land at Mazimbu (1,000 hectares) and Dakawa (10,000 hectares). At Mazimbu, the ANC built SOMAFCO's secondary school, primary school, nursery school and the Adult Education Centre. At the Dakawa Development Centre, the Ruth First Education Orientation Centre, the Vocational Training Centre and the Dakawa Arts and Textile Centre were built. These structures were complemented by boarding complexes, youth centres, a multi-purpose library, daycare units, sports facilities, a 16-bed hospital, two clinics, and many staff houses.

Two farms and several small industries for furniture, clothing and leather production provided for the needs of learners and the community at large. Both settlements were endowed with infrastructure for running water, electricity, sewage and a road network. All these facilities were the result of the ANC's planning and construction departments. Volunteer experts from many countries and local Tanzanian workers made substantial contributions.

Mazimbu and Dakawa developed as mini-municipalities which provided services, undertook maintenance work, supplied food and other needs and had a range of structures for administration, transport, housing, motor repairs and so on.

The impressive output of physical facilities, the production of food and clothing, and the provision of various services made the ANC significantly self reliant. Looking back, the ANC's achievements in 14 short years can be seen as a remarkable case study of service delivery. Dedication, discipline and volunteerism were important ingredients that contributed to this success story.

If the building of facilities was a daunting assignment, even greater was the challenge to formulate education policy, the curriculum and pedagogic methods and principles. This was at the heart of the SOMAFCO project. In the context of the people's education movement inside South Africa at the time, Jack Simons, a member of the ANC's National Education Council (NEDUC), wrote in 1985: "Developments at SOMAFCO have to an increasing extent been coincident with those in SA. It is in this way that SOMAFCO has not only become the site of an alternative educational establishment for exiled South Africans, playing a pivotal role in the overall strategy of the ANC for seizure of political power, but also an important platform from which to develop, experiment with and adapt rudimentary forms of People's Power."

The ANC's education policy aimed to prepare cadres for the struggle and for a liberated South Africa. Six principles, the antithesis of the philosophy underlying Bantu Education, were adopted to guide the development of SOMAFCO. The education should:

• aim to produce a new type of South African dedicated to non-racism, non-sexism and social justice;
• be accessible to all irrespective of age, colour, creed, race or sex;
• be based on scientific and cultural values, drawing on advanced scientific knowledge and progressive cultural traditions of the people of South Africa;
• combat the division between mental and manual training and the artificial separation between the arts and the sciences;
• promote the full participation of learners, educators and the community;
• adapt to the demands of a changing world.

In many respects, SOMAFCO's secondary and primary schools had curricula that were outcomes based - learner-centred, based on collaborative learning and continuous assessment, and non-authoritarian teacher-learner relations. The secondary school offered 10 subjects. There was dual emphasis on the social sciences and the natural sciences and mathematics. The former were examined by the ANC's own examination board, while English and the sciences/maths were examined by the University of London Examination Board.

SOMAFCO graduates had the option of obtaining scholarships through the ANC's National Scholarship Committee to universities in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe and Western countries, or doing vocational training at the Dakawa Vocational Training Centre or elsewhere.

In some respects, SOMAFCO was a microcosm of what pertains in South Africa at present. The teacher complement was uneven, with excellent teachers on the one hand and poorly qualified or unqualified teachers on the other. Teacher shortages and a high turnover were perennial problems. However, even with these constraints, results were reasonable and many students went on to tertiary and further education and vocational qualifications.

SOMAFCO had a mix of students. There were those who had taken part in the Soweto Uprising and other subsequent student resistance activities and were highly politicised. At the other extreme were those with no political background. Those with leadership potential were a great help to the administration of the school. There were those students who could not come to terms with the harsh realities of exile, some of whom were deeply affected by the torture and imprisonment they had experienced.

Today, 30 years after it began, SOMAFCO has an important legacy. This includes firm ties of friendship between Tanzania and South Africa. In July 1992, when the late ANC President Oliver Tambo handed over SOMAFCO to the then President of Tanzania, Hassen Ali Mwinyi, he expressed the hope that Mazimbu and Dakawa would remain as monuments of the friendship and solidarity between the peoples of Tanzania and South Africa.

The facilities of Mazimbu and Dakawa are now used by the Tanzanian ministries of Education and Labour. The Sokoine University of Agriculture based in Morogoro uses the extensive facilities at Mazimbu, which is now called the Solomon Mahlangu Campus of the university. At Dakawa, the Ruth First Orientation Centre is now a thriving secondary school while the Vocational Training Centre we left behind offers training in six trades to 150 trainees annually. The ANC-Holland Solidarity Hospital has become part of the Morogoro regional health service, while the farms and small industries are also functional.

SOMAFCO featured strongly in the ANC's international campaign against apartheid. It was instrumental in creating bonds of solidarity between ordinary citizens in many countries and the oppressed people of South Africa. As a result, since 1994, South Africa has been able to established strong diplomatic ties worldwide.

The objective of preparing cadres for the liberation struggle and for a liberated South Africa was largely achieved. Many former SOMAFCO students are serving in important roles within and outside government today.

Documents and artefacts from Mazimbu and Dakawa are lodged as part of the ANC archives at the University of Fort Hare. They provide a rich source of information on SOMAFCO and the wider Mazimbu and Dakawa communities, giving insights into the many issues and complexities of a unique and proud exile experience.

It is against the background of this legacy that we launch the SOMAFCO Trust. It is a legacy of hard work, commitment and sacrifice, which should stand us in good stead to achieve the objectives of the trust: thought, initiative, leadership, and youth development.

** Henry Makgothi is a former member of the ANC National Executive Committee. This is an edited extract from a speech delivered at the launch of the SOMAFCO Trust, 6 April 2007.

More Information:

• Somafco-X Trust

White identity in a changing SA / Part I

Still colonial after all these years

A fortnight ago, we undertook to carry a belated review of the book, "Whiteness Just Isn't What it Used to Be - White Identity in a Changing South Africa," by the South African academic, Melissa Steyn. Our reviewer has persuaded us that, instead, we should publish this review in five parts.

What follows is the first of the five-part review, which will discuss the five narratives of "whiteness" discussed and analysed in the book.

Among other things, based on an analysis of the answers of 49 respondents to a questionnaire, the book seeks to understand the essence of the responses of white South Africans to socio-political change, and the implications of these responses, relative to what being white has meant to the whites, historically.

"Whiteness", in the South African context, connotes the conscious and unconscious feelings and assertions of racial superiority of white people over Africans and over black people in general. Steyn traces the origins of these feelings and assertions to European racism ("Western racialised whiteness") and certain myths that pre-date colonial conquest, myths which have long pervaded some conceptions of the European political and quasi-moral order of things.

In this Introduction, we discuss key constituents of these myths and belief systems and how they manifested themselves in the assertion of whiteness during the colonial era, to date.

Steyn identifies and analyses five prevailing narratives of present day South African whiteness as it grapples with the change from apartheid to a non-racial democracy. The narratives are:

• 'Still colonial after all these years', which "holds on to a sense of importance of whiteness..." in which "Power is, and should be, in the hands of whites to influence change along European, 'white' ways..."
• 'This shouldn't happen to a white'. This narrative still clings to whiteness and sees the changes taking place in the country as having a "disempowering" effect "with catastrophic implications" to whiteness. According to Steyn, "This is a story about whiteness besieged, insulted, and victimised by present circumstances, which have robbed it of its power to control, and even influence the future."
• 'Don't think white, It's all right' which sees whites as having lost power and, as a result, envisages options of "new forms of subjectivity within a more inclusive structure". The essential characteristic of this narrative is that it does not encourage or discourage the abandonment of white identity as ordained by colonial and apartheid power relations.
• 'A whiter shade of white,' avoids acknowledging and confronting the personal - and therefore collective - implications of South African socialisation. Steyn calls it "a narrative of denial: engaging in thinking about one's own racialisation is blindly terrifying".
• 'Under the African skies (or White, but not quite)' does not retain familiar discourses of whiteness. It draws on other cultural repertoires to supplement or replace previous white identities.

Why a (continued) discussion of race and racism?

The ideal of a non-racial, non-sexist and democratic South Africa has guided our movement since its inception. Indeed, many of our people died in pursuit of this noble ideal. Rightly, non-racialism informs all of our government's policy prescripts, precisely to build a non-racial, non-sexist and united South Africa based on human dignity.

It is nevertheless self-evident, and in any event it would have been foolhardy to expect this, that such a society cannot come about simply and singularly as a result of policy interventions - significant though this is. South African society as a whole, must engage in dialogue, leading to concerted national action, painful as this process will inevitably be.

Steyn's introductory remarks are therefore instructive: "The present climate in South Africa, where there is considerable resistance to talking about race as a social category, makes it necessary to say a few words about the wisdom of a study that addresses the issue of racial identity when so many South Africans are intent on dissociating the country from its racialised legacy."

She continues: "The constitution of the New South Africa is founded upon the premise of non-racialism, and [has been] part of the discourse of ... popular struggle as it seeks to establish equality and bridge differences. Non-racialism is also often recast in the mould of liberal colour-blindness, with the consequence that middle class South Africans, both black and white, frequently express the belief that drawing attention to race as a societal issue is anachronistic and harmful."

In this regard, Steyn observes a tendency which has evidently grown since the publication of the book six years ago in 2001: "To name race is taken to be racist. The most frequent comment I receive when asked about my work is 'Aren't we beyond this?'"

She notes the pain occasioned by our history, which elicits ambivalence towards any discussion on racism. However, she counsels against this kind of schizophrenia, saying: "If the structures of feeling that informed the old South African institutions are to be dismantled, an approach that takes cognisance of the long-term effects of colonialism and the concomitant process of racialisation is essential."

She thus calls for "a constructive engagement with the past", in order to foster reconciliation and a different consciousness - in short, an emancipating consciousness!

Slavery, European myths and South African racism

Steyn, as historians before her have done, traces the origins of racism to the slave trade during the 16th century. In this regard, historian Basil Davidson wrote that, "Familiar European contempt for Africans was an attitude born of the slave trade after about 1650, and later, of the cultures of European capitalism. It has no instrumental existence before."

To build and propound the image of Africans as inherently inferior, Steyn argues, Europeans recycled pre-existing discursive resources, "notably Greek discourses of the savage and the barbarian, medieval Christian mythology, and the notion of the chain-of-being that had been present in Europe in some form since Aristotle..."

As Europe expanded during the 16th century - the so-called period of discovery and conquest - it conferred upon itself, the position of the "cultured", and tagged those with whom it came in contact as "savage/barbarian". This seemingly innocuous discourse "had in fact been around in Europe for centuries" but without racial connotations.

Africa and Africans only came to be represented as characteristic of every notion of backwardness and inherent incapacity for development during the 16th century, while Europe and Europeans cast themselves in morally superior terms just as they were dehumanising 'The Other' through slavery on a massive, commercial scale.

According to Steyn, the power to define, and to order to their liking, the material conditions of the colonised, "predisposed Europeans to only the very most superficial knowledge" of the colonised. The correlative to the depiction of the African as uncivilised "necessitated that they should have civilised masters". It also necessitated, and justified, "a sinister proclivity for genocide, at a psychological and even physical level."

Steyn asserts: "A lack of appreciation of the individual humanity of others who [came to be] valued entirely in terms of their surplus value to whites, meant that there were few restraints in the treatment of ... Africans." She stresses that, "The package deal of white civilisation included the rights of both appropriation and obliteration."

Sadly, yet another factor that was to be used in the armoury against Africans was an Europeanised Christian religious narrative, namely, that of saved souls as opposed to heathens. "The biblical story of Noah's curse of Ham's son - 'Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren' - for example, was seen as an explanation of and justification for slavery. The story provided an account that assuaged any pangs of conscience brought on by awkward convictions of the equality of humanity before God."

By the seventeenth century the explanation included the notion that the curse had been responsible for the darker skin colour of Africans. Black thus came to represent the colour of the devil which association, through convoluted processes of linguistic bewitchment, would be used to assign to the colonial project a perverse appearance of moral authority.

Since the accidence of birth occasions one the colour of one's skin, "inequality ... did not need to be analysed, it could be taken as a condition."

Says Steyn: "Light skin [came to signify] a natural grouping of people, who through a superiority 'endogenously determined' occupied a dominant relationship to darker skinned people." The reader cannot, but think of the divisive effects of colonial presentations of Africans as constitutive of different, desperate "tribes" who must, at the slightest of provocation, obliterate one another in a senseless orgy of blood letting when Steyn writes: "While not particularly unifying across troublesome ethnic boundaries within Europe, the invention of whiteness provided people from Europe with a supra-nationalism that enabled them to ensure that the emerging social formations brought about by European expansion were articulated to their greatest self interest."

We must stress that our organisation, the African National Congress, has never and does not believe that any religion is supportive of the thesis of the inferiority of any of our people. Rather, religion (un-perverted) has been and continues to play a fundamental part in the liberation of the world's poor.

The third arsenal in European racist discourse was the purportedly natural chain-of-being, a hierarchical ordering of the universe from the micro-organisms of inner earth to the gods of the heavenly sphere. Turned the wrong way around to justify racism, it was perverted by artificially re-placing a category of human beings characterised as African at the rung of the chain closer to animals than other human beings.

Melissa Steyn says: "Once established as part of the world of animal nature, Africans became legitimate objects of domination through natural science. The humanness of white people was never in question in these schemata, indeed the human was fully equated with whiteness."

The inevitable corollary was that blackness was equated with something less than human.

This introductory discussion takes us to a closer inspection of the first of the five narratives of whiteness.

Narrative one: Still colonial after all these years

Steyn says of this narrative:

"The defining characteristic of this narrative ... is that the person still constructs whiteness around the belief that whites are in a position to define themselves and the 'other' more or less unilaterally, and that intervention needs to take place on 'white' terms, for the 'good' of the 'blacks'. Power is perceived to reside in the hands of whites, who should still largely dictate the content and pace of change."

The narrative consists of two versions, "The hardliner colonial" and "the altruistic colonial".

Hard line colonialists are naturally obdurate. They have little if any regard for human dignity as they cannot perceive of humanity outside of whiteness. The following remark by one of Steyn's respondents, a business person from Gauteng, is revealing:

"My whiteness was never a real issue. Generally white was more superior intellectually. Today I am more convinced than ever of this." The businessperson claims commitment to the advancement of black people. The problem, however, arises from "their (black people) lack of commitment in wanting to be uplifted, and their inability to maintain higher standards". The committed businessperson hopes to continue along his good path of advancing black people "without having to lower standards" to accommodate them. He is of the firm view that black and white cultures are "historically entrenched and completely incompatible".

These remarks are indeed revealing, for the mental world of this white compatriot provides an idea of the nature of his practical relationships with black people on a daily basis and at all levels. Through this revelation, we can, for example, understand how he would be a factor in the origination and exacerbation of work place problems that would arise at his business establishment, the difficulties that would arise between him and potential black business people and clients in pursuit of their mutual and self interest as economic actors. Indeed, when human relationships are typecast in terms of superiority and inferiority, it is difficult for any mutual respect to evolve.

In the mental world of the businessperson, and to use Steyn's words, "Whiteness still ought to be able to perform the function of social control."

Thus an accountant remarks: "I have a farming interest, and therefore work with unskilled [black] labour. They expect me to care for them. I see my whiteness as being a caretaker."

In the minds of the white South Africans, the socio-political context within which black people, in general, came to constitute the majority of the unskilled labour force alongside the privileged position of the majority of white people does not arise. Rather, this complex subject is reduced to the supposed inherent inferiority of black people who are, according to the fallacious assumptions of the hardened colonial, akin to little children, permanently beholden to the largess of whites.

Listen to the accountant again: "Being white means that I am part of the culture that has developed SA socially and economically and has created an orderly way of life which appears to be what the blacks want - perhaps the presence of whites will help the attainment of black goals without too much disruptment."

An ever-present feature in the analysis of the hardened colonialist, is the division of good and bad blacks, an aspect of which we spoke earlier in reference to how whites defined themselves in contrast to black people as constitutive of separate and different tribes devoid of a common destiny. History attests that this colonial feature has practical political tactical usefulness, for through it, the colonialist rules with ease by dividing their subjects.

In line with this age-old colonial divide-and-rule tactic, in fact in this instance to perpetuate racial stereotypes, the accountant says: "There is a major difference in 'blacks/nonwhites' in towns/cities and farms. In towns people want the same objectives (basically) but on farms you have a lot of peasants who only want to drink and have no responsibilities and who have no basic moral standards - these people are commonly called 'kaffirs' by the people who work with them. Unfortunately most farmers only associate with these peasants and therefore their perception of 'black' people is distorted."

The altruistic colonial is equally driven by the notion of white supremacy and the accompanying belief that blacks cannot think or do anything for themselves without the unimpeachably good aid of white people. Its result, says Steyn, "is a construction that reflects a struggle to reinvent a future in the name of the old." She cites a PhD consultant in the field of social transformation who says:

"I read adventure stories about explorers meeting savages. I recognised there were utterly different, lesser human beings, enlightened (to some extent) by contact with whites. White people were the only 'real' people. Today I regard myself as a member of the human race of Caucasian origin with a European cultural tradition and civilisation. The associated 'world view' has become dominant in the world, partly for better, partly for worse. I am very conscious of the cultural roots and identity of a white person and would never be anything else, but I am growing in understanding and appreciation of the other streams of humanity."

The respondent goes on to say, revealingly, that, “my experience has probably not been that different from the experience of whites in Europe and America.” He boldly asserts: “I don't believe ‘blacks’ could have absorbed the educational and life experiences I had because of a radically different orientation in the cultural being. This difference takes much more time and shift in consciousness to be bridged.”(our emphasis)

The use of language here is interesting for our analysis of whiteness and racism. The PhD graduate assumes cultural advancement can only be attained by people of a particular racial grouping. This leads him to the logically inconceivable assertion that the inherent racial abilities and implied weaknesses of which he speaks can only be bridged by "much more time and shift in consciousness" - whatever this means.

Says Steyn, this is "far from being related to originary, essential qualities that inhere in individuals or a group of people who are naturally bounded for whatever reason, in fact, constructed through discourse. The attempt of a dominant discourse to fix social identities is an exerciser of power."

Illogical as this narrative evidently is, there are many in our country who, through no fault of their own, retain these and worse views. Through no fault of their own because, as Steyn says, "as a native South African, I cannot remember a time when I was not aware of being 'white'. Race was the defining factor in any South African's life."

In line with the defining role of race, Steyn continues to say that "White people lived in nice houses, went to good schools, did the work that mattered, had culture, and decided political issues. Other South Africans worked in our houses, on the roads on the farms. They were labourers, although some were terrorists, to be feared.

"During weekends most dark-skinned men would disappear into the townships [and villages] and we would enjoy the white beaches, the white cinemas, the white parks, and our private swimming pools. Our maids would prepare our food (except in some homes where the worthy woman of the house would not have black hands work with the food, although such hands could wash the dishes after the meal); they would sleep in a room at the back of the house, use the back door and separate ablution facilities, and eat with separate cutlery and from tin plates and mugs."

Steyn asserts: "These things were common to practically all white households, even working class homes, English and Afrikaans, give or take a few differences in cultural nuances."

Next week, we will discuss the second narrative: 'This shouldn't happen to a white' which as we said earlier, also clings to whiteness and sees the changes taking place in the country as having a "disempowering" effect.

** "Whiteness Just Isn't What it Used to Be - White Identity in a Changing South Africa", by Melissa Steyn: State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. 2001.

What the media says

The Shatt al-Arab and media accountability

Like everybody else, we were very happy to hear the news on 4 April that Iran had decided to release the 15 British sailors and marines it had detained on 23 March. This ended the worrying prospect that young people, one only 21 years old, and another a 26-year-old mother, could serve many years in prison.

Naturally, both the relatives of the sailors and marines, and the British government, were justifiably thrilled at this development and did everything they could to extend a warm welcome home to the young military personnel.

At the same time, like everybody else, throughout the 13 days during which the British sailors and marines were held by Iran, we were concerned that the confrontation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United Kingdom should not further worsen the explosive atmosphere that characterises the region of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.

The high-level media attention given to this incident only served to heighten our feeling of unease. However, we could not avoid asking ourselves the question - what was this specific conflict, involving 15 British military personnel, all about?

On the face of it, it did not present itself as a major threat to international peace and security, requiring, for instance, intervention by the UN Security Council. The Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, described it as "a minor border incident", which indeed is what it appeared to be.

Iran claimed that the British inflatable boats had crossed into its waters. The UK claimed that when they were captured, these boats were in Iraqi waters. Whatever the truth in this regard, it is difficult to imagine that the boats could have posed any security threat to Iran.

With regard to the matter of the maritime border, it also seems that in any case there are many unanswered questions about where exactly the boundary lies, between Iraq and Iran on the Shatt al-Arab waterway, and the area south of this waterway.

On 4 April, the BBC reported that, "Martin Pratt, director of research at the Durham University's International Boundaries Research Unit, said shifting coastlines caused problems as it meant the median line could not be calculated precisely.

"'Maritime boundaries are generally a matter of a coastline. A coastline with well defined headland is easier. A shifting coastline with mud flats that appear and disappear over time mean you don't have a sound basis with which to draw a median line. The line could shift from month to month. It makes it much harder to see with any confidence. And that is the case in this situation.'

"He added: 'It is always dangerous to be dogmatic about a boundary unless the line is clearly defined in a treaty that is accepted by both parties.'...

"Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, and head of the maritime section of the Foreign Office between 1989 and 1992, believes neither side in the dispute could claim to be right.

"'The truth is nobody can say if we were in Iraqi waters or if we were in Iranian waters because at this point the boundary is extremely fuzzy,' he said. 'This area is extremely contested. It is an area of great dispute.'

"He said the UK had 'made a big mistake by producing a map that has a very definite red line and saying we were definitely in Iraqi waters'. He stressed that, equally, Iran could not say definitively that the UK crew had been in its waters.

"'What has happened in this case is something of a muddle. The difficulty is that in this area the boundaries, once you get inside territorial waters, are just not defined.'"

In 2004, eight British sailors were captured by Iran on the Shatt al-Arab, and subsequently released. Then, on 24 June 2004, the BBC had reported that, "British officials have said that the men may have mistakenly strayed over the maritime border...Their release follows three days of talks between British diplomats and Iranian officials. Iran had initially said it would prosecute the men for illegally entering Iranian territory."

Fortunately, the similar 2007 confrontation between Iran and the UK was defused when Iran released the British sailors and marines. However, we do not know how this was achieved because British Prime Minister Tony Blair said no negotiations took place, despite the report by Associated Press that, "Britain insists it never offered a deal, instead relying on quiet and sometimes silent diplomacy."

The Yorkshire Post reported that Prime Minister Blair said: "Throughout we have taken a measured approach, firm but calm, not negotiating but not confronting either."

Elsewhere the Prime Minister said: "It is correct to say that there are channels of communication (with Iran) that have opened up that have not been available to us in the same way before, and I am not just content, I think it is sensible that we pursue those channels of communication...Yes it was a bilateral dialogue that resolved this, but I think the dual track of having international pressure mobilised and the door opened to that dialogue, without any deals, without any negotiation, I think it was the dual track that delivered this."

In the end, it seems that what happened is that two small British inflatable boats carrying 15 lightly armed sailors and marines found themselves at a point in the waters separating Iran and Iraq which might have been on the Iranian or the Iraqi side of these waters. The Iranian navy thought they had entered its waters illegally, and therefore arrested them. The sailors and marines and their commanders argued that they were in Iraqi waters.

Neither side has claimed that it ever viewed this "minor border incident" as a meaningful casus belli, in the original meaning of this phrase. It should indeed have been resolved through bilateral negotiations - or bilateral dialogue, as Prime Minister Blair puts it - without much drama.

And yet, for many days, the international media treated the incident as the very essence of global earth-shaking news, communicated virtually every hour, every day, as "Breaking News". We could not help but conclude that clearly, behind this extravagant international exuberance about what was objectively a hardly consequential item of news, there must have been much more to a minor border incident than meets the eye.

Haaretz said: "Iran understood the advantages of a diplomatic solution. If the arrest itself, which was carried out on the eve of a United Nations decision on sanctions, was meant to deliver the message that Iran is not afraid of sanctions and that it distinguishes between the nuclear issue with matters pertaining to its territorial sovereignty, the diplomatic solution is no less important. It will now be used by Iran as proof that even powers such as the US and Britain are limited in their ability to use force when it comes to a minor border incident - and that the threat Iran poses is precisely in initiating local incidents that are not sufficiently important to lead to war."

James Dobbins, a former Bush administration envoy to Afghanistan who now heads military analysis for the RAND Corp think tank in the United States, said: "It allowed the Iranians to demonstrate that they can't be trifled with. They have a capacity to take action, and that will undoubtedly make people more careful."

The Chicago Tribune reported that Bruce Riedel, a former Middle East expert for the CIA and the National Security Council, said "the Iranians accomplished what they wanted to accomplish: They sent the message that if the US and the UK are going to mess with them, and specifically with the Revolutionary Guard, then they are able to mess with us. And they did it where we are most vulnerable...This is not a one-off event. I think it's the beginning of a pattern of confrontation."

In more lurid fashion, the nationally syndicated US columnist, Kathleen Parker, wrote: "On any given day, one isn't likely to find common cause with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He's a dangerous, lying, Holocaust-denying, Jew-hating cutthroat thug - not to put too fine a point on it.

"But he was dead-on when he wondered why a once-great power such as Britain sends mothers of toddlers to fight its battles...When a pretender to sanity like Ahmadinejad gets to lecture the West about how it treats its women, we've effectively handed him a free pass to the end zone and made the world his cheerleaders.

"Not only does the Iranian president get to look magnanimous in releasing the hostages, but he gets to look wise. And we in the West get to look humiliated, foolish and weak. Just because we may not 'feel' humiliated doesn't mean we're not. In the eyes of Iran and other Muslim nations, we're wimps. While the West puts mothers in boats with rough men, Islamic men 'rescue women and drape them in floral hijabs."

Perhaps for the reasons advanced by Haaretz, Kathleen Parker and others, in the global media the "minor border incident" at or near the Shatt al-Arab came to overshadow even the daily tragedy of mass killings in Iraq. It brought to the global television screens the familiar "talking heads" of well known global actors such as Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Presidents Mahmoud Ahmedinajad and George W Bush.

The intense media coverage of the 23 March minor border incident at or near the Shatt al-Arab has, once more, brought to the fore the question - what is news!

If the answer to this question is that news is what the media decide is news, then we must accept that an important part of the reality to which all nations and states will have to respond will be what the media determines to be important reality, which it will present as news.

If humanity must inevitably accept that it has no choice but to depend on the media to set at least an important part of the national and global agenda, the critical question must be answered - what means will society evolve to ensure the accountability of the media for its actions.

In 2005, Denis JA Muller submitted to the Department of Political Science of the University of Melbourne, Australia, "in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy", a thesis entitled "Media Accountability in a Liberal Democracy: An examination of the Harlot's Prerogative."

Dr Muller wrote: "The challenge is to find ways of exerting accountability that more adequately meet the demands of a modern democratic state without trespassing on the principle of a free press. Freedom of the press has a long lineage. It was forged in controversies spanning three hundred years in England, and given eloquent expression in the Constitution of the United States. Its existence is regarded as a sine qua non of a democratic state, whether or not it is embodied in a written constitutional provision. In Australia it is recognised by the common law inherited from England, augmented from time to time by case law. Processes by which the media are brought to account should not violate this freedom. Yet that cannot be an excuse to do nothing."

The saturation media coverage given to the minor 23 March border incident at Shatt al-Arab, whatever the subsequent justifications and the speculation that accompanied this coverage, has confirmed the urgent need for human society, while respecting the principle of a free press, to answer the question - given that there can be no excuses for inaction, what is to be done to ensure media accountability, which more adequately meets the demands of a modern democratic state and a democratic world order!

Return to Index