Don’t blame federalism for tribalism
* Article
* Comments (3)
email Email
print Print
pdfSave
separation
increase
decrease
separation
separation
*
*
*
*
By Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba.
April 26, 2011 — I do not intend to write much on the details of the
Equatoria Conference that took place in Juba lately, because I simply
don’t know much about it. And although being from Equatoria I intend
to approach this very topic here in a way that will only represent my
personal and political views which others regardless of where they
come from will have to agree or disagree for what I write and not
where I come from. This said, the conference have so far already
attracted criticisms from those who disapprove of it, to those who saw
no need for it at this particular time. But of course you want to know
what I would say for probably you are already acquainted with what the
others had to say. So you are welcome on board.
The quest for a federal system of governance out dates the resent
Equatoria Conference as we should all rightly know that it was what
our fathers requested for in 1947 when the ‘Closed District Act’ was
finally repealed and South Sudan became part of the united Sudan for
the past sixty years or so. Today in 2011 South Sudan remains a
multinational society, where the maintenance of our different
heritages remains issues of contention.
What I read from the other critics has to do with the call for a
federal system of government in the emerging independent republic of
South Sudan. There is already a criticism that a federal system will
be a recipe for tribalism and thus preventing the evolvement of our
new nation into a unified people. Others say that such a system would
lead to regionalism or may even fail to offer equal development in the
country.
However the truth of the matter is—and experience has been the
teacher—that some ‘federal’ systems fail, some do not;...some inhibit
economic growth, some do not;...some promote a great measure of civil
liberty, some do not; some are highly adaptive, some are
not...whatever their condition at any one time...it is rarely clear
that it is so because of their federalness, or the particular
character of their federal institutions, or the special way they
practice federalism, or in spite of their federalness.
If the above analysis is right, then federalism may be associated in
some cases with a rise in the frequency and intensity of ethnic
problems and in other cases with a decline in the frequency and
intensity of such problems. That is, no consistent relationship would
exist between federalism and the rise or decline of ethnic problems.
Although federalism continues to be viewed by some leaders of minority
groups in Africa as a solution to, and by some leaders of majority
groups as a cause of, such problems, the preponderance of scholarly
work on this issue in Africa and elsewhere supports the above facts,
i.e., it suggests that federalism is not consistently related to the
promotion or settlement of ethnic problems. So why would people
advocate or oppose something which has not proved to consistently
cause or solve ethnic problems?
There is much to help us contend that federalism’s impact has never
been consistently harmful: “the Nigerian evidence shows that
federalism can either exacerbate or mitigate ethnic conflict. Much
depends on the number of component states in a federation, their
boundaries, and their ethnic composition.
At the start of the Second Republic the new Nigerian federal
framework...utilized all five mechanisms of conflict reduction....
First, the proliferation of states /dispersed some of the conflict
into more parochial forums. Second, the new states provided arenas in
which intra-ethnic conflict might also occur. Third, a result of this
was to enhance the position of some political parties at the expense
of others, especially in the North, paving the way for greater
inter-ethnic cooperation in the all-Nigerian arena. Fourth, as the new
states fought to advance their interests, a few non-ethnic issues and
actors were also introduced. And, fifth, the separate state
bureaucracies provided career opportunities for groups not well
represented in the federal civil service, probably what the Equatoria
Conference aims to achieve.
However because we in south Sudan like anywhere else in Africa are
obsessed with ethnicity there will be a strong urge to discuss what
others may refer to as the “Ethnic Problems” under federal system.
The impreciseness in the concept of “ethnic problems” derives from the
diversity of meanings given to both words in the expression. In many
cases
It can be noted that the concept of conflict is contested. “The main
distinction is between those who advocate a broad definition of
conflict, including both latent and manifest conflict, and those who
advocate a narrow definition encompassing only manifest conflict….Our
definition is…simply… ‘perceived divergence of interest’….A national
conflict, then, involves conflict between two or more nation-groups.
Our use of the word “problems” corresponds to broad definition of
conflict, i.e., one including both manifest and latent forms.
Although such conflict involves many possible issues, the
distinguishing feature is the adjective which precedes it.
It can be argued further that the term ‘ethnic conflict’ covers a wide
range of situations. In fact, it might be argued that ethnic conflict
as such does not exist. What does exist is social, political and
economic conflict between groups of people who identify each other in
ethnic terms: colour, race, religion, language, national origin.
Very often such ethnic characteristics as mentioned above may mask
other distinguishing features, such as class interests and political
power, which on analysis may turn out to be the more important
elements in the conflict. Still, when ethnic differences are used
consciously or unconsciously to distinguish the opposing actors in a
conflict situation—particularly when they become powerful mobilizing
symbols, as is so often the case—then ethnicity does become a
determining factor in the nature and dynamic of the conflict.
We south Sudanese should know better throughout our short history
together, that “the phenomenon of ethnicity....has been used to cover
a range of types of political conflict that are differentiated not
merely by the dynamics of competition between rival groups but also by
the very significance of ethnicity itself....The reality is that the
same label is used here as an umbrella for a great diversity of types
of conflict.”
I am not claiming here that I know it all however some sense can still
be made of the relationship between federalism and ethnic problems if
we focus on (a) the general phenomenon of which both federalism and
ethnic groups are manifestations and (b) their use as political tools.
Federalism is one mechanism for the distribution of power within a
political system; ethnic problems are the outcome of competition among
groups representing different types of identity. The distribution of
power can be used for a variety of purposes, as can identity. Just as
a carpenter can use tools to produce many different products, so can
those who manipulate the distribution of power and employ identity.
The tool may marginally affect what can be built, but what is built
depends more on the intentions and skills of those able to use the
tool.
So to link ethnic problems when they can even exist under unitary
centralised systems of governance and blame it on federalism is just
bull shit. Federalism serves the purpose it is meant to achieve, and
that is the distribution of power. However in the absence of
accountability, transparency, rule of law, freedom of press,
multipartysm and the respect to Human Rights ……in the absence of
democracy any system fails, call it whatever.
The author: Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba. Secretary General - United South
Sudan Party (USSP). He can be reached at: [email protected] or
[email protected]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JFD
info" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jfdinfo?hl=en.
