1989/2009 1989 – The Verge of New Departures

For Africa, 1989 was a watershed year. The promise of democracy heralded by the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War was only comparable to the euphoria of the independence movements in Africa in the 1960s and Nelson Mandela’s release from incarceration in 1990.

People everywhere on the continent started to believe again in democracy as a synonym for human rights, an end to dictatorships, a rebirth of civil societies and a multi-party system. Once again, as was the case in the heydays of the independence movement in the 1960s, Africans thought they were in control of their own destiny and at the brink of a new beginning in their history. But 1989 was also seen by Africa as a mark of the triumph of neo-liberalism, of un-regulated capitalism and of the breakdown and privatization of national healthcare and educational institutions. No wonder that popular culture named the post-1989 democratic movements in Africa “demo-crazies.”

A Long Century of Nightmares

The assumption that we’ve arrived at the end of a short century (1914 to 1989), and that what is good for the former Soviet Blocs in Eastern Europe is also good for people in Latin America, Asia and Africa amounts to a reduction of the world’s history as the West may see it. As far as decolonization and the struggle against imperialism are concerned, however, most people in the Third World don’t necessarily consider themselves inhabitants of a short century, but of a long and nightmarish one, with wars still being waged against their religions and civilizations. They have witnessed how, first, their economies have been destroyed and walls have been erected to curb their traffic into the West. In Africa’s specific case, you could say the Century really began in 1885, with the Berlin Conference, the precursor to European powers’ scramble to secure large swathes of the continent. It has yet to end.

Kenya and Zimbabwe are both excellent examples of how the “1989” phenomenon affected the African continent. It was a time of hope, with a distinct sense of anticipation that a second era of liberation was on the horizon. It opened new spaces for organising civil societies and for multi-party discussions on how to build a common future in these countries. As the Cold War drew to an end, the West lost strategic interest in supporting one-party systems – like the Kenya African National Union (KANU) – against their former Soviet Union-backed neighbours Ethiopia and Tanzania. Arap Moi, Kenya’s strong man, until then a highly valued ally of the West, came under increasing criticism for corruption in his administration and for the brutal repression of opposition leaders.

In Zimbabwe, however, developments took a completely different turn. While Arap Moi’s one-party system in Kenya was significantly weakened by the withdrawal of aid from the Western countries, Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) was able to consolidate its grip on the state apparatus. In December 1988, not one year before the fall of the Berlin Wall, Mugabe formed a strong one-party system, tightening his dictatorship and effectively shielding Zimbabwe from the democratic winds of change blowing over the rest of Africa. Until today, Mugabe’s form of incendiary populism still profits from the failure of the British to resolve the land issue and the class position of the white minority in Zimbabwe.

Fundamentalism Run Rampant

On the one hand, 1989 marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War, which had forced the world to close its eyes to the brutality of the Apartheid regime in South Africa and the crimes committed against humanity elsewhere in Africa. What has since become clear, however, is that 1989 was one of several factors that led to the legalisation of the ANC in South Africa, the independence of Namibia, the departure of the Cubans from Angola, the weakening of one-party systems and to the decline and expulsion from office of some of the continent’s strongest strong men: Mobutu Sese Seko, Mengistu Haile Mariam or Moussa Traore, to name a few. After 1989, “civil societies, modernization and democratization,” “multi-party systems” and “national conferences and reconciliations” emerged as the new buzz words in Africa. On the other hand, 1989 also opened the floodgates for a revival of “primitive” tribal customs and religious fundamentalism (both Islamic and Christian). The “new world order” brought civil wars, child soldiers, and blood diamonds all over Africa.

Against this background, the events of 1989 therefore represented at least three types of epistemological break. First, 1989 marked a new beginning for African political self-determination, respect for human rights and serious social investment in modernity and democracy. Second, 1989 sent a signal to Europeans and Americans that they could forget Africa as a serious geo-political region of the world, requiring major infrastructural investment. And, third, 1989 heralded the return to a long-repressed form of racism from the 19th century. The hallmark of the “new” racism is the depiction of Africa as a hopelessly rigid entity devoid of any reform, whose only value lies in its natural resources, like oil, coltan, gold, diamonds and cocoa.

Extract from a talk given at the House of World Cultures, Berlin in February 2009. This text is available in an extended version in a book to be published in September 2009 by Susanne Stemmler, Valerie Smith and Bernd M. Scherer (ed.): 1989 – Globale Geschichten . Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag 2009, 304 pages.