Kae Matundu-Tjiparuro
It is really not only disappointing but a betrayal as much of the highest order tantamount to high treason.
Especially when perpetrated by fellow descendants of the survivors of the Genocide of the Ovaherero and Nama by colonial Germany. Yours Truly Ideologically has been careful not to through any broadside at fellow descendants.
Believing other descendants other than him are no less and no more descendants then the next one. Thus what they have been and may have been busy with is as much legitimate and genuine like any other descendant.
In Marxist-Leninist terms that their interests and genocide cause may be antagonistic but not agonistic to the broader cause. This cause being for the successor government to Imperial Germany, today the government of the Federal Republic of Germany, to atone for this Genocide to and for all descendants. In whatever way as may consonant with the United Nations 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Because if the Genocide of the Ovaherero and Nama is to find any beginning towards real closure one day, it cannot otherwise but be within the rubric of the 1948 UN Convention.
There’s and cannot be any doubt that what Imperial Germany committed in the then so-called German South West Africa, as Namibian was christened by Imperial Germany and her fellow accomplices who partook in the infamous 1884 Berlin Conference, which scrambled and partitioned Africa among scavenging Caucasians Europeans, is genocide.
But not genocide from today’s perspective as Germany has been maintaining, and continues to although it has lately been trying to tone down. But which in essence has been a mere gimmick and not genuinely said and intended.
For until Germany submit this question to the frameworks of the 1948 Convention, and not continues to subjugate it to her bilateral relations with Namibia, their efforts shall remain what they are, mere attempts at appeasing no one else but the Namibian government, her presumed equal development partners and friendly country.
In essence and reality all signs have been pointing to a mere relationship between a former coloniser and colony. The former coloniser being Germany herself, and the former colonised being Namibia.
As a member of the Left Party (Die Linke) in the German Parliament, the Bundestag, Sevim Dagdelen, well aptly observed and put it during her visit to Namibia in 2022.
Germany has never been at the same wavelength, let alone as the descendants of Genocide, regarding the question of Genocide, Apology and Reparation (GAR).
Having all along been categorical that what Imperial Germany committed against indigenous Namibians, were mere atrocities. An aspect that she has time and again been repeating and even reflecting in her officialdom.
Not only this but Germany has never believed in genuine atonement having from the outside rejected what can and could be seen as the natural outflow of any genuine negotiation, which is reparations as behooves the crime of Genocide.
“A Trilogy To Remembrance- Remembering the Past, Reconciling the Present, Shaping a Brighter Future,” was the title of a panel discussion last Wednesday at the House of Democracy, hosted by the Namibia Institute of Democracy (NID) and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation.
Intended to raise the awareness of the youth and educating them on the “Ovaherero and Nama Genocide of 1904-1908”. With German Ambassador to Windhoek, Thorsten Hutter, and Ueriuka Tjikuua, a descendant, as panelists answering questions from the predominantly youthful audience.
A chip from the old block, goes the saying. Ironically Tjikuua seemed to be on this occasion a chip from the German Ambassador as from the survivors of the Genocide. Or has he become a chip of the Namibian government?
Most descendants who are and have not been part of the negotiations between Germany and Namibia on GAR, have been highly suspicious of the negotiations, staying aloof of them and eventually rejecting in total their end results, the Joint Declaration.
Listening to both Hutter and Tjikuua, one cannot but justify and uphold their rejection. As the two more than anything confirmed and affirmed the position of Namibian government and its German counterpart on GAR is not reconcilable with any descendant believing in the sanctity of demand for the acknowledgement of Genocide.
Positions which are diametrically opposed. Which on close scrutiny is no longer a matter of antagonism but agonistic towards each other.
Yours Truly Ideologically has always been of the believe that the perceived division within and among descendants is only a matter of different tactics, strategies and approaches.
But listening to Hutter and Tjikuua, it was all the more apparent that the cause has been surrendered to bilateralism. In which Germany has been calling the shots, a clear pointer to her superiority in the negotiations as a former colonising power.
A superiority which all along has been underlying the negotiations while Namibia has been pretending to have been an equal negotiator. Which Tjikuua acquiescing that reparations is something that has never been part of the negotiations.
As Germany, from the onset, was clear if this was about reparations, then there would be no negotiations. It goes without saying the negotiations between Namibia and Germany has not been about reparations.
Nor could it equally has been about genocide. Explaining the unilateral N$18 billion offered by Germany through the Joint Declaration (JD). For that matter Germany has never pretended in any way to be engaged in negotiations for reparations other than development aid. With the only party pretending it to be reparations being the Namibian government. That Tjikuua a descendant that he is accedes to that such is based more on Germany’s political will, as opposed to obligation in terms of international law as per the 1948 Convention.
Albeit Tjikuua legal advice from legal experts in London, United Kingdom, pointed to the futility of a legal challenge. Synchronising with Germany’s own aversion to such a prospect.
Be that as it may, the question remains as to what and whose mandate Namibia and Germany have been engaging in negotiations? Given that a section of the descendants, if not a significant part thereof, not having been a part thereof and having rejected the JD. How legitimate then is and could the JD be? To the extent of even still continuing with it and the negotiations surrounding it?
