Kae Mtundu-Tjiparuro
Perceivably, there are divisions among Ovaherero and Nama genocide descendants and their communities on the question of reparations.
Perceivably because the said divisions are not real. Not only this but for that matter they are not essentially between and/or among the descendants and their communities.
Because there’s no doubt that descendants and communities of the survivors of the Ovaherero and Nama genocide committed by Imperial Germany, are and have been searching and clamouring for reparations.
Thus any pronounced division is between the Namibian government that has decided to go against the best wishes, interests and desires of the descendants and their communities.
Instead, if there is and may be any difference and/or divisions between and among the descendants and their communities it is a superficial one manufactured by the Namibian government itself to fit its own devious agenda.
Reparations in terms of the United Nations are defined by basic principles under which they can be subjected and measured. Their level and nature.
Remedies and reparations to qualify as such must be adequate and effective. For the claimants, in the case of the Ovaherero and Nama genocide, the descendants and their communities, such reparations should be adequate and effective.
Further the descendants and their communities should have access to effective justice.
Are the Ovaherero and Nama descendants and their communities differing among themselves on these principles and are they the source of their presumed divisions?
These principles are to ensure that any remedies and/or reparations offered to the descendants and their communities are not a mere token.
The said and/or perceived divisions between and among the Ovaherero and Nama descendants and their communities, to be real, must be principled on whether the Joint Declaration (JD), adheres to the said principles.
There’s a political undertaking, as opposed to an agreement and/or treaty between the Namibian and German governments.
The 2006 motion of the Namibian National Assembly adopted unanimously, is clear that the Namibian government should have facilitated a dialogue between the descendants and their communities and Germany.
Preceded by a national conference of all the descendants. To iron out any misunderstandings, ultimately as it has come to be, to be manufactured for what they are today.
Mention must also be made about the whole process leading to the negotiations. About which the descendants and their communities were not consulted. Invited to just become passive onlookers thereof.
Relegated, even for that matter, to the structures with no decision-making powers. With the highest being the political committee, essentially comprising only Cabinet ministers.
Thus, reflecting deeply and thoughtfully and critically on all these, one cannot but conclude that there’s no division between and among the descendants and their communities.
Except a superficial and manufactured one. Since actively taking the initiative to implement the 2006 National Assembly resolution, the government has been paying lip service to it to save its own face.
Rather than meaningfully implement it so that at the end it produces meaningful remedies/reparations. As opposed to the tokenism that the JD is.
The best that the Namibian government has been doing, has been sowing divisions between and among the descendants and their communities, to achieve its own bilateral agenda with Germany.
“Underling the special nature of German-Namibian relations as stressed by Resolutions of the German Bundestag in 1989 and 2004 confirming a special historical and moral responsibility towards Namibia,” as paragraph in the Joint Declaration well encapsulate.
Adding to it another paragraph “recalling the support for Namibian independence, in particular the implementation of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 435 (1978) from the two states in Germany in the long Namibian struggle for independence, and from the united Germany to the development of Namibia thereafter.”
The two paragraphs from the JD clearly speak to the relationships between the two countries, and by extension the two governments that cannot and shall never be overridden and subjugated to the demands of an “insignificant” community, the Ovaherero and Nama for reparations.
Simply put German-Namibian bilateral relations and the considerations thereof as far as the two governments are concerned , and continue to be, are most paramount.
Be that as it may be, it stands to reason if the descendants and their communities themselves have not created the monster of the perceived divisions amongst themselves.
By allowing both the Namibian and German governments to wrestle the issue from them and pretend to drive it while in reality they have been usurping it towards their own bilateral agenda.
In the final analysis the perceived divisions are within the powers of the descendants and their communities to demystify it.
Wrestling the issue back in their control and drive it forward the way they deem it fit. For Africa, and the international community are slowly but surely awakening to causes such as the one of the Ovaherero and Nama.
If the movement for reparations for slavery, which is gaining more momentum, is anything to go by. The Ovaherero and Nama genocide is definitely an integral part of this movement. But it is up to the descendants and their communities to make the call.
*Kae Matundu-Tjiparuro is a descendant of the survivors of the Ovaherero, Ovambanderu and Nama genocide, veteran and freelance journalist and reparations advocate and adherent of restorative justice.
