Showing posts with label gender relations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender relations. Show all posts

Does empowering women require a new language?

Encouraging a Gendered Balance in Peacebuilding Discourse - allowing alternative worldviews and values...

Summary


“The subaltern woman’s muteness is rooted not in slavish contentment but in her inability to conceptualise the injustice to which she is subjected. Like all diagnoses, this analysis implies the appropriate remedy: what the subaltern woman needs is a conceptual framework, a language capable of articulating her injuries, needs, and aspirations. The existing discourses or texts of exploitation do not provide such a language: even when they promise explicitly to liberate the subaltern, they obscure the distinctive nature of her oppression; indeed, by purporting to speak for her, they position her as mute. In order to articulate her specific exploitation, the subaltern woman must create her own language…She can overcome her silence only by collaborating with other subaltern women in developing a public language for their shared experiences.” (Jaggar 1998:12).

The focus of this discussion is, how can peacebuilding discourse include gendered values and concerns, and in so doing create new languages and worldviews to balance the current dominant paradigms? This question includes such issues as what is meant by “feminine” and “masculine” values, and whether these are mutually exclusive. Furthermore, the very nature of discourse itself needs to be examined – including power relations behind and within discourse, and the concept of empowerment in and through discourse.

Further questions relate to the dominant Rational /Scientific paradigm, as expressed in political, economic and development discourses – and consequently in peacebuilding discourse. This patriarchal worldview is in many ways the antithesis of all that is considered “feminine” – emotional, intuitive, inclusive, collaborative, holistic, spiritual. This has had extremely damaging effects not only on women, but also on the natural world, indigenous or marginalised populations, and children. 


Can feminine values and concerns be adequately expressed within this framework? Can peaceful values be promoted through languages based on competitiveness, control and exploitation? Discussion of the African context will attempt to ground aspects of these theories, with reference to specific peacebuilding structures. Do African women involved in peacebuilding share the views of Western feminism regarding gender roles, the importance of ‘gender mainstreaming’, and the need for political participation/ a ‘political platform’?

The discussion concludes that peacebuilding discourse has mostly been from a Western, often neoliberal perspective. Instead of empowering and liberating women in differing cultural contexts, this tends to exclude, mute and misrepresent the concerns of the “subaltern” women of the world. Only once the discourse is truly open and inclusive, creating a space for collaborative contributions from both genders and all cultural worldviews, can needs and values be defined – and only then will they be successfully implemented in peacebuilding programs.

Introduction



Conflict and social injustice around the world affects men and women differently – and the plight of women is especially heart-breaking - statistics and copious amounts of research surrounding gender and peacebuilding paint a bleak picture of the current state of gender relations. Despite gender-aware programs, gender-sensitivity in language and training, the gap between the genders does not appear to be closing – in terms of actual daily experience. 

Do women need to create their own language? What Jaggar and others are saying, is that existing discourse is inadequate to reflect the experiences and desires of women, especially women of the ‘third world’ – considered to be ‘subaltern women’ because of their subjugation in the social order. However even attempts to point out deficiencies in existing peacebuilding discourse either speak for ‘the subaltern woman’, or suggest teaching her to speak another language, usually that of the existing male-dominant discourse. Jaggar is instead advocating a collaborative exchange of ideas and values between ‘subaltern women’ to enable their own language to emerge. 

In the case of Africa, the focus of this essay – we need to listen to the already emerging language, listen to the African voices – already rich in their own wisdom and values.

Galtung’s concept of cultural violence makes us aware of the “discursive nature of violence” (Lane 1998:43), emphasising the role of discourse and symbolism in constructing a reality where violence and injustice appears acceptable. For this reason, examining peacebuilding discourse around the concept of gender is an important step towards identifying future empowerment strategies, as well as past failures. “We cannot rely uncritically on the categories of established discourse” (O’Neill 2000:316) – discourse established by the dominant (usually male) groups cannot adequately express the concerns of the marginalised (usually women). 


The ‘feminine’ values like care, concern, and co-operation also place a high value on relationship, over control or authoritarianism (Jeong 2000:77), and are in many ways the antitheses of the patriarchal framework within which politics, economics, science and development have long functioned. The feminist movement has proposed an alternative world system, based on the overarching concepts of inclusivity and wholistic approaches - which include consideration of the natural world (Jeong 2000:85). 

In keeping with these values of inclusivity, mutual dependence and cooperation, expressed so well by Gandhi as “Separation is violence” – the central aim of peacebuilding should therefore be to bring unity while celebrating diversity. Rather than creating separate “spaces” or “languages” for each gender, women and men can together build a new language of shared human values, and together educate and strategise for a peaceful future. As Malalai Joya, the infamous female Afghani politician and human rights activist says, “Society…is like a bird – one wing is man, one wing is woman. When one wing is injured, can the bird fly?” (Strong 2007:38).


Peacebuilding

Peace theorists view peace as a lot more than the absence of war or violence – it can be best be summarised by the Hebrew word ‘Shalom’ - peace, harmony, welfare, safety, soundness, tranquility, a state of completeness, wholeness, health, prosperity, fullness, rest, and community with others, including the interactions between humanity and creation. A summary of women’s views of peace at the recent International Alert 'sharing know-how’ workshop envisioned:
a world in which rights and democracy are respected and in which people can be content in their own identity, express their own culture and control their own resources, and in which they are able to experience happiness, joy, love and care for others…They wanted diversity and ‘constructive conflict’ to be recognised and celebrated in a context free of fear and violence…justice, respect, progress, forgiveness, understanding and solidarity…respect for women in the home as well as in public life’ (El-Bushra 2003:33).

Peacebuilding is where the universal meets the specific – where peace research and theories need to become concrete strategies in a specific context and culture. One of the central points of this essay is the importance of education and creating a new, shared language with built-in values like peace and justice. However, this should not be taken to undermine the importance of other concurrent peacebuilding initiatives – both the grassroots efforts to make practical changes, and the international campaigns for legal and political frameworks for peace with justice. As Paolo Freire once wrote:
I do not believe in any effort called peace education, if instead of revealing the world of injustice, it tends to cloud and blind its victims…Reflection, if it is true reflection, leads to practice” (Bendana 2003”39).


With this in mind, it is a matter of some concern that peacebuilding has become closely linked with development discourse – which is itself a contested concept, having its roots in economics, politics and international relations. These fields of knowledge are in direct opposition to all of the values which peacebuilding seeks to promote – and we need to remember that when negotiating our way through the current discourse, which is a minefield of assumptions and hidden agendas. While there is a lot of truth to the observation that:
“…the nexus between security and development is indisputable. Insecurity hampers development and the absence of inclusive development substantially exacerbates factors that lead to conflict” (Williams 2006:31);

The concept of development has undoubtedly shaped how Africa sees itself, and frequently attempts to speak for so-called ‘developing’ countries from a Western viewpoint of what is considered ‘the good life’.

In addition, peacebuilding and development discourse rely extensively on the concepts of needs and values - yet needs models themselves are not value- or gender-neutral, but frequently used to promote political agendas and assumed value preferences (Reimann 2002:21-22). One of the central themes of this essay is the fact that “only under conditions of adequate knowledge and undistorted communication can men’s and women’s true needs be known” (Reimann 2002:20).

The neoliberal bias of Western powers overseeing peace agreements in Africa and elsewhere, results in a focus on political and civil rights over social and economic rights (Hudson 2006:14)– which would empower women more directly. Therefore,
“sustainable peace requires a more permanent transformation of social norms around violence, gender and power…it is not enough to change the structures and focus only on claiming rights” (Pillay 2006:8).

Going deeper than political rights and structures, we need to develop an alternative worldview - a new language with peace values from both genders. This would need to be an unashamedly moral viewpoint – as
without a larger spiritual and moral framework, which endows human endeavour with meaning and purpose, with coherence and unity, wouldn’t the emphasis on rights per se lead to moral chaos and confusion?” (Muzaffar 1999:29).

Peacebuilding needs to emphasise personal and interpersonal transformation as the primary means of long-term social change. Lederach notes that transformation must be “rooted in social-psychological and spiritual dimensions” due to “the immediacy of hatred and prejudice, of racism and xenophobia” (Lederach 1997:29). Clearly a re-examination of gender relationships is integral to this process - education and expansion of our language to create greater mutual understanding could significantly impact individuals, transforming our interpersonal relationships, and whole cultures, to the point where war is no longer seen as the solution.


Gender

Gender is considered by social scientists to be defined socially, through cultural discourse, symbolism and role expectations. Reimann describes gender in terms of three inter-relating dimensions - “the individual gender identity” (social norms and individual response to those), “the symbolism of gender” (the construction of stereotypical gender-dualisms), and “the structure of gender” (organisation of social action, public and private spheres) – all of which combine in ways which are historically and culturally fluid (Reimann 2002:3). 

In this essay, when speaking of feminine and masculine values or attributes, this is not meant as gender “essentialism” (Lane 1998:44, Nagel 1998:245), or a dichotomised view, but is used in the sense of being “less so” and “more so” in respect to each other (Helliwell 2000:800). This simply implies that women and men are “better” at some things than others, e.g. both genders are able to work and care and lead, but they will excel in some tasks and perhaps not others (Helliwell 2000:802). This common sense approach is a concept which is well accepted in the Eastern world, especially through the Dao concepts of Yin and Yang. This essay will not attempt to explain the causes or extent to which gender differentiated behaviour and values exist – but rather take our experience of difference as the point from which to discuss potential strategies and partnership in peacebuilding.

In many ways Nationalism, militarism and democracy can be seen as masculine projects and institutions, with women as merely “supporting actors” in very well-defined, limited roles (Nagel 1998:243, 253,261). In contrast, as the African proverb says, “a woman has no tribe”(Nagel 1998:261). The values inherent in the process of nation building seem to predominantly include ‘masculine’ ideals like patriotism, bravery, duty, competition and honour (Nagel 1998:251-252). For these reasons, it has been said that women may have less of a vested interest in sustaining particular political systems, and are therefore more likely to advocate peace and reconciliation (Strickland & Duvvury 2003:8). 


Again, it is important to remember that idealised masculinity also excludes many male members of the human community, and stunts the development of most others. Horrocks stated that it requires a certain amount of “self-denial, a shrinkage of the self, a turning away from whole areas of life, the man who obeys the demands of masculinity has become only half-human…” (Nagel 1998:246) Theroux lamented, “the expression, ‘Be a man!’ strikes me as insulting and abusive. It means: Be stupid, be unfeeling, obedient, soldierly and stop thinking” (Nagel 1998:246). In contrast, we could “set these fundamental dimensions of our humanity free from their ‘private’ exile and accept them as the only genuine starting point of meaningful human community” (Rees 2003:234).

In peacebuilding discourse, certain recurring themes can be seen when discussing gender differences, and some of the feminine qualities mentioned relate to an ethic of care, “the need for emotionality and the free expression of emotions” and “a need for otherness…some kind of appreciation of the other whose views are as important as our own” (Reimann 2002:17). However this is a shared characteristic in humans - combat training for example, requires strategies to suppress the ‘feminine’ caring nature of men (Reardon 1990:142). P
erhaps the key is rather to view these as shared qualities which find their expression in different ways in both genders, and to different degrees. 

There is also much reference to the gendered experience of violence – with “the body as the site of violence” for women particularly (Nicholson 25), and the “feminisation of poverty” (Jeong 41) being central to these discussions. Gender is frequently at the centre of structural and cultural violence – and the symbolic significance attached to femininity in many cultures becomes a justification for repressive traditional practices (Jaggar 1998:7). 

This again reinforces the intertwined connections between masculinity and nationalism, which tends towards male privilege and female subjugation (Nagel 1998:254). As a result of the assumed dualisms of ‘male’ and ‘female’ characteristics, for example, it is expected that men will be stronger and more active, courageous and rational – therefore better suited to leading and ruling – while women are expected to remain in the private sphere because they are seen as emotional, passive, and weak but caring (Cohn et al. 2005:2).
“If we perceive peacemaking as an exercise in rationality, peacekeeping as a display of ‘force’ and peacebuilding as a caring, nurturing endeavour it becomes clearer as to why and where women are excluded or included. It brings forth essentialist notions of the inherent ‘peacefulness’ of women and innate ‘violence’ or ‘rationality’ of men” (Pillay 2006:4)

Gender differences can therefore be seen as based in the shared experiences and education of women as opposed to men - rather than in inherent biological characteristics defining behaviour (Reardon 1990:138). With specific reference to African women as a political group, there is a well accepted notion of their shared “context of struggle” (Sadie & Loots 1998:1). For example, the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security in their 2005 open letter to the UN Security Council stated, “we welcome reconciliation after peace comes, but too often amnesty means that men forgive other men for atrocities committed against women” (Nadjibulla 2005:2). A recent UNIFEM report found that
all over the world…women have challenged militarism and urged reconciliation over retribution…they have transformed peace processes on every continent by organising across political, religious and ethnic affiliations” (Rehn & Sirleaf 2002).

However, there is a fine line between this view and the tendency to assume that women are more peaceful due to their ability to give life – which results in a narrow view of women in only certain roles (Vincent 2003:9). There are also many documented examples of women contributing to war efforts, and even instigating violence (Hudson 2006:13; El-Bushra 2003:25-26).

In contrast to the post-modern critique of feminism, which takes issue with the notion of any overarching values or interests amongst women, it is clear that the agency of ‘the subaltern woman’ (Jaggar 1998:12) can be increased only through
solidaristic community that sustains one’s identity through mutual recognition…Distinct from the language of eternal contestation, conflict and haggling over scarce resources, the primary virtue in politics is the creation of an enlarged mentality’ (Vincent 2003:9).

The idea is of coming together as a group, with shared experiences, to ‘strengthen their voices’ (El-Bushra 2003:36) and thereby achieve their goals – an example of power in discourse being achieved in a ‘feminine’ way, through cooperation rather than competition.

Discourse as Empowerment

Habermas and Apel referred to discourse as a process of “obtaining universal consensus in conditions of domination-free communication” (Jaggar 1998:8). Habermas wrote about an ‘ideal communicative community’, without limits and separate from conventions, where the specific context could give rise to new meanings, created by the power of interaction itself (Ashenden &Owen 1999:159). He viewed ideal communicative action as the orientation of participants towards reaching mutual understanding and ‘an egalitarian relation…that preserves their differences’ (Ashenden & Owen 1999:201). However this is clearly seldom the case, especially from a gendered perspective. Communication is always power-based – with access, inclusion and equal participation being especially problematic for women and non-westerners.

If power can be defined as more than enforcing one’s will, but also as “the ability to impose one’s definition of what is possible, what is right, what is rational, what is real” (Fishman 1983:89). Then discourse is clearly linked to power – where ‘power in discourse’ is the struggle for power within the discursive setting, while ‘power behind discourse’ is the control of forms of discourse and access to discourse, as a means of maintaining power (Fairclough 1989:74). For this reason, “communication is the mechanism of emancipation and the struggle against domination” (Fairclough 1989:75). Lederach also points out that acknowledging and sharing one another’s stories is an essential first step towards reconciliation and restoration (Lederach 1997:26).

The dominant discourse is not necessarily the ‘right’ or even the majority view, but simply the loudest voice. The assumed universality of certain values and ideas further alienates those who are excluded from the dominant discourse, as alternatives are not even considered to exist, let alone debated (Jaggar 1998:11). Feminists have long argued that there needs to be more of an emphasis in discourse on “listening, personal friendship, and responsiveness to emotion…concern to address power inequalities” (Jaggar 1998:22). Whereas current male-dominated forms of discourse “restrict communication to the initiated, leaving all others both uncomprehending and voiceless in the debate” (Cohn 1987:703).

Current discourse in peacebuilding

Current peacebuilding discourse around gender issues appears to focus on including women in programs and decision-making structures – with terms such as “Women in Development” (WID), “Gender and Development” (GAD), and “Gender Mainstreaming”. These are all rather vague and nebulous catchphrases, calling either for quotas of women to be involved in planning and implementing of projects, or for
making women’s concerns and experiences, as well as men’s, an integral dimension of the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies…so that women and men benefit equally and inequality is not perpetuated” (Koen 2006:11).

How this is to be done, or whose opinions will be counted as representative of ‘women’s concerns and experiences’ (or even men’s) is open to debate. The justification for this is rather one dimensional too – women are viewed as an untapped resource in the development potential of a nation (Williams 2006:31) - rather than as deserving inclusion and equity purely due to their inherent value as human beings, regardless of their levels of productivity. These narrow neoliberal assumptions frame much of the current discourse on women and peacebuilding (Hudson 2006:11). What is needed is a transformative approach, rather than merely an instrumental one – which usually amounts to co-opting.

A recent report by the International Centre for Research on Women (ICRW) found that despite gender-sensitive language, gender-mainstreaming, and the implementation of institutional frameworks promoting gender equity, peacebuilding efforts
continue to fail to address underlying gender roles and associated power dynamics that lay the basis for institutionalised gender discrimination…[or] the relationship between masculinity and violence against women…[and] gives inadequate attention to the construction of gender norms and the processes by which they can be transformed to ensure more equitable gender relations” (Strickland & Duvvury 2003:2).

Also, the International Alert 'sharing know-how’ workshop participants cited challenges to peacebuilding that included:
centralised control of national resources such as land…the inability of male-dominated authority structures to manage conflicts non-violently…patriarchal cultures, including religion…that undermine women’s rights…traditional reconciliation mechanisms…social fragmentation and a lack of shared identity” (El-Bushra 2003:51)

This is particularly interesting, coming from women at grassroots level, rather than political policy documents or intellectual circles – so one could plausibly assume they are speaking for themselves, rather than having these grand ideas imposed upon them from ‘outsiders’. It appears that the antidote to a patriarchal system is not a stronger women’s movement, causing further levels of separation, but an approach to the future that is the shared responsibility of both genders – inclusive, diverse and cooperative. 

Since the idea of a unified women’s movement and agenda is problematic anyway, the path towards peace may inevitably require individual and interpersonal transformation of this sort - while still recognising the value of political and legal frameworks as tools of administration, it seems unrealistic to expect externally imposed standards to achieve social change.


Dominant Paradigms

At the core of political discourse is the patriarchal idea of the ‘nation-state’, which is ostensibly responsible for the security of its citizens, but simply monopolises the means of violence, and legitmises violence in its own defence (Albrow 1996:38). The rational/ scientific paradigm which gave birth to democracy, neoliberalism, and even concepts such as human rights and development, has long been seen by feminists to “epitomise the ‘male’ stance towards the world…Scientific progress, rather than leading to harmony and co-operation between peoples has fostered violence, poverty and domination” (Perrigo 1991:313). 

The ‘gender-dichotomised pairings’ mentioned previously are again evident in discourse about science vs. nature, mind vs. body, analysis vs. intuition, military vs. civilian (Cohn et al. 2005:3). In its extreme form, this discourse can be seen as the dominance of “masculine” science over “feminine” nature. Habermas referred to this unlimited extension of rationality to every aspect of life as the ‘project of modernity’ (Albrow 1996:28). This contrasts sharply with spirituality and ‘feminine’ ways of knowing and intuition (Nussbaum 2000:328).

Scientific and economic thought often depends on internal logic for its validity, rather than its correspondence to reality, and is removed from any concerns over the morality of outcomes (Cohn 1987:712). Economics is prone to basing its assumptions on human behaviour as selfish, competitive and greedy – which results in very different answers to those obtained by viewing humans as capable of relationship, altruism and mutuality (Cox 1993:274-275). 
Development discourse is equally presumptuous at times, and has been accused of “marginalising or precluding other ways of seeing and doing”, especially with respect to the way the ‘third world’ sees itself (Rai 2002:74). Some research even suggests that the ‘feminisation of poverty’ is “a direct result of women’s inclusion in the development process” (Simmons 2003:244). 

Certainly, development and economic strategies transform subsistence activities, customs and social relations – frequently in ways that are detrimental to all – unless strenuously defended by the local population (Lehman 2003:355). In contrast, ecofeminists envision an alternative model of development which is “anti-patriarchal, decentralised, interdependent and sustainable” (Rai 2002:68). Peacebuilding programs and strategies should rather seek to mediate between competing needs – in other words, ensuring that “the market-place feeds the stomach but doesn’t replace the heart” (Lehman 2003:357).


Since the feminine has been confined to the private sphere, the public sphere has become sanitised of emotions, and the values considered to be feminine and therefore less valued, or ‘unprofessional’, even ‘irrational’. As Cohn pointed out in the context of defense intellectuals, “we must give careful attention to the language we choose to use – whom it allows us to communicate with and what it allows us to think as well as say” (Cohn 1987:690). This can be broadened to include the whole of current dominant peacebuilding discourse - especially development, which does not allow certain questions to even be asked, or certain values to be well expressed. 

Instead, bringing the feminine balance back into discourse could enable us to see these apparent opposites as simply “contingent conflict”(Nussbaum 2000:332) – due to the multi-faceted nature of life, the value of a plurality of ideals and goals must be taken into account, and are often to be held in tension with one another. As for example with reconciliation, which Lederach explained as “the place where Truth and Mercy have met together, Peace and Justice have kissed” (Lederach 1997:28-29).


Collaborative discourse

Learning to operate within existing language frameworks can be very empowering; however the language restricts users in terms of the content and even the perspective from which they can express ideas or objections within the dominant system (Cohn 1987:705,708). Calls to empower women to participate in political and legal frameworks – in a sense teaching them to speak the right language to be heard in ‘a man’s world’ – may be further stripping women of their inherent value as women. Perhaps we should rather capitalise on the fact that
women’s…capacity to influence – where it exists – is not their access to specific forms of political power but rather their capacity to appeal to the common humanity of those engaged in or supporting war” (El-Bushra 2003:53).

This is not a call to abandon attempts to include women more fully at all levels, but simply a reminder that there are multiple ways for women to use their voices, and there should always be the option to refuse to abandon one’s own language for someone else’s.
“To be real, the choice must be totally under women’s control, and the value of other forms of knowledge must not be ridiculed. Economic and social self-sufficiency is surely a better option than integration…to oppressive structures such as the international market…and a violent world order dominated by a powerful group of men…” (Simmons 2003:252).

We need to pull back the neoliberal veil that obscures any ability to see possible alternative viewpoints and solutions, remembering that concepts like democracy, human rights, peace building and gender justice run the risk of being co-opted, and being used to legitimise hegemonic regimes like the United States – especially in the post- 9/11 world (Bendana 2003:33).

The path towards this freedom of thought and inclusive discourse in peacebuilding is certainly through education and a consequent re-assigning of true value and meaning to our terminology. In this way, “Peacebuilding need not follow neoliberal economics in the Orwellian ‘newspeak’ allowing propositions of bombing in order to build, war for peace, or ‘developing’ for impoverishment” (Bendana 2003:6). 

Clearly, what is required is for peace-enhancing virtues to be promoted in peacebuilding discourse, as well as in politics and related fields – regardless of their previous links to one or other gender – as human virtues and values worth preserving in their own right (Vincent 2003:9). Education and language can be used as tools in shaping ‘non-violent gender identities’ of the future – allowing for differences between the genders but highlighting shared values such as peace, care and co-operation (Lane 2003:33-35), and redefining the meaning behind terms like ‘security’ and ‘strength’ (Cohn et al. 2005:11).

The general consensus from international women peace activists brought together for International Alert’s workshop in 2002, was that the most important contribution to peacebuilding which women could make is ‘to develop an alternative, gendered view of society that will lead to transformation at all levels of structures, practices and social relations, including gender relations’ (El-Bushra 2003:5). 


The absence of documented experiences of women in peacebuilding in the south, from their own point of view, was also noted (El-Bushra 2003:6). This effectively mutes women, as stated in Jaggar’s quote at the start of this essay (Jaggar 1998:12), but also raises the issue of whether women must necessarily become politically aware in order to achieve agency – is this not simply forcing women to engage in male forms and frameworks, rather than allowing the freedom to act in many other ways?


The African context

The above discussion can now be brought to bear on the African context, where evidently,
The high incidence of violence against women in Africa can be attributed to an interconnected range of cultural/ religious, economic, political, military and criminal factors. Culture or customary law is the first factor that influences the physical security of women. The subservient status of women, particularly rural women, in many African countries is deeply rooted in tradition. Through various marriage rituals, most of these women are objectified. Rituals such as lobola (bridewealth), (female) child pledging, and the tradition of inheriting women (being regarded as the property of fathers, uncles, husbands and older brothers) depersonalise women. These practices set the stage for inflicting harm on women such as beatings by husbands, marital rape, femicide, sexual harassment, and genital mutilation. In the name of tradition, different moral standards often apply to men and women.” (Hudson, quoted in Koen 200:1)

For this reason, interpersonal transformation is the key to lasting change in Africa, rather than exclusively focusing on political and legal frameworks. Internalising gender equality and peace values is of the utmost importance in delivering any lasting change. This approach would of course take longer - requiring a paradigm shift, and a re-focusing of resources, strategies and energy – however the current approaches are clearly not working. For example, goal 3 of the Millennium Development Goals is to “promote gender equality and empower women” by 2015 (Rehn & Sirleaf 2002). 

Yet, the current experience of women in Africa during times of conflict is particularly disheartening - in their home countries they are raped, mutilated and tortured, forced into sexual slavery and prostitution – and then upon arrival in refugee camps, expecting shelter and aid, they are sexually exploited or abused, or forced to marry strangers to survive in the host country (Magwaza 2003:35).

The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSC 1325) identifies these issues, but it is unclear how any amount of legislation will deter those responsible – within the African context, these are events taking place in remote areas, unhindered by the rule of law, and frequently the staff within international organisations are themselves responsible for violations (Pillay 2006:5). Frequently the African cultural frameworks are deeply disrespectful of women’s needs, and it is clear that
legislation alone cannot create a region that is gender-aware and sensitive, and that behaviour changes in society cannot be legislated but need to emerge organically as a result of leadership by example, and the use of the media and prominent figures to promote gender awareness” (Ruiters 2007:1).

UNSC 1325 has contributed to significant progress in African countries to acknowledging rape and other violations of women as crimes of war, and grounds for refugee status (Magwaza 2003:36). Yet the situation in Africa means that gender equity is only one of many identity issues to be resolved - such as ethnic clashes, reclaiming indigenous culture, spirituality and religion, and reasserting independence after colonialism swept the continent (Pillay 2006:1). 

Many African governments are themselves responsible for human rights abuses, or ignore the constitution and rule of law to remain in power – they are hardly likely to focus on implementing the rights of women (Koen 2006:9). In other countries, customary and religious law is given precedence over statutory law - and religious fundamentalism is a growing force in Africa (Koen 2006:9). Even in countries that have made significant progress in introducing legislation advancing women’s rights, like Uganda and South Africa, with pressure from above and from the women’s movements at grassroots level - “the impact of legislation is generally only the first step because entrenched practices do not disappear overnight” (Koen 2006:7). Furthermore, the institutions and structures responsible for enforcing and monitoring women’s rights in Africa, at all levels, are weak and lacking resources to deliver their mandates (Koen 2006:8).

The African Union (AU) in 2002 announced that half of its commissioners would be women (Magwaza 2003:36), and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) summit of 2005 concluded that the current 30% quotas for women in leadership should be increased to 50% by 2020 (Ogunsanya 2006:14). However, this is only a step in the right direction, as it appears that women in Africa can exercise their agency more effectively at grassroots rather than political levels, and concepts like “gender mainstreaming” and quotas have not translated into recognisable gains for women in Africa. It has been pointed out that “the mere presence of women in parliaments does not change the institutional culture or nature of policies” (Ruiters 2007:3) - the African political and cultural background means that often women are co-opted by men dominating, excluding and undermining their contributions (Ruiters 2007:3). Here again is evidence of the power behind and within discourse preventing equal participation.

The SADC also released a Protocol on Gender and Development in 2006, which deals comprehensively with a number of gender equity issues, including a call for the protection of women in the private as well as public spheres (Ruiters 2007:2). However, the most promising aspect of the protocol, in light of the discussion above, is the call for member states to provide “gender sensitisation and rehabilitation programmes, counselling services, and training programmes for service providers, survivors and perpetrators of gender-based violence and sexual harassment” (Ruiters 2007:3). 

Education must surely be more effective than just legislating against gender discrimination and other divisions within societies. Again, women could be instrumental in this process, as educators of their families and communities (Koen 2006:7). The fact that democratisation in Africa has been hurried - and in many cases, externally imposed – means that it has not had time to ‘take root’ and could become problematic in the future (Koen 2006:11), unless ownership of these processes is encouraged at the community level.

Proposals to provide training and support for women to increase their participation in peace talks and decision-making bodies, as well as alternative methods of soliciting women’s views (Pankhurst 2000:19), overlook the fact that these are traditionally masculine contexts, and as such the very framework within which these women would be trained to operate, would ensure that all discussion would take place on those pre-determined terms only. In the African context, this traditional mentality can be summarised in the attitude displayed in Burundi – “women couldn’t be part of the discussion because they don’t have arms…how can women bring their experiences and expertise to the table? We have only paper” (El-Bushra 2003:40). 

We need a new framework, one which is not predisposed toward either gender, but incorporates the peace values of both. In addition, the required institutional culture change needs to be the responsibility of men too, working in partnership with women (Pankhurst 2000:20). This appears to have been the reason for success in South Africa, where the African National Congress (ANC) Women’s League demanded that women be “equally represented in the negotiating teams, [or] the negotiations would stop. For a whole day, nobody could talk until all political parties included women” (Modise in El-Bushra 2003:63). The ANC had also taken a deliberate decision to ensure a third of their parliamentarians would be female, “to ‘reward’ women for their role as political activists” (Sadie & Loots 1998:23).

There is also an emerging language of
African feminism with specific needs and goals arising out of the concrete realities of African women’s lives. The point of departure is to address oppressions simultaneously, and in that context gender is but one unit of analysis that sometimes has to subject itself to the universal bond between men and women against racism and imperialism…the notion of ‘womanism’ …better accommodates African women’s reality and identity and…emphasises cultural contextualisation, the centrality of the family and the importance of cooperation with men (Hudson 2006:7).

African women have made it clear that they view men as partners in the struggle for gender equity and social justice – a different focus to that of western feminism. The fact that Africa is “a continent in crisis” (Hudson in Koen 2006:2) – with corruption, undemocratic processes, lack of political accountability, control by elites, and ongoing war in many states – means that both men and women are insecure (Koen 2006:2). However, this also means that there is the potential to reshape the “political opportunity structures and universes of political discourse” (Hassim in Koen 2006:2) in favour of both gender equity and long-term peace. A good starting point for many African countries would be the military and police forces–
As long as African governments continue to pay lip-service to basic democratic principles, the military will remain largely a sectarian and undemocratic institution founded on the principles of the protection of dominant racial, class, ethnic, and gender groupings” (Hudson in Koen 2006:10).

What is needed is to challenge the traditional meanings assigned to masculinity in this context – to re-imagine what a ‘real man’ would do, and provide gender aware training (Pillay 2006:5). The need to explore alternative forms of masculinity and gender roles, is especially important in post-conflict situations, where men’s identities may be damaged, and often they revert to traditional thinking and stereotypes (Sideris in Strickland & Duvvury 2003:9), in their search for security and esteem. Integral to this transformation, is the African concept of “Ubuntu” which many peace activists are already focusing on – it means:
“…my humanity is caught up, is inextricably bound up, in theirs. We belong in a bundle of life. We say, ‘a person is a person through other people’. It is not, ‘I think therefore I am’. It says rather: ‘I am human because I belong’. I participate, I share. A person with ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others...” (Tutu in Rees 2003:228-9)

The United Nations Observer Mission to South Africa (UNOMSA) in 1994 was a wonderful example of a woman-led, gender-balanced team, who through their presence in the host country, modeled healthy gender relations and the strength of certain ‘feminine’ traits like “concern for the wider needs of the community, shedding symbols of status and power, networking, sharing information, making intuitive decisions, and using a hands-on approach” (Pillay 2006:6). It has been said that the UNOMSA example, as well as the role of women in the anti-apartheid struggle, opened up a space for women to claim their place in the new South Africa (Pillay 2006:8).

Conclusion

If we can bring balance to peacebuilding discourse through a new language containing both feminine and masculine values, this will result not only in empowerment for women – but this ‘empowerment in discourse’ would allow future generations to see the world through new eyes. 

In turn these balanced views and values would result in collaborative peacebuilding efforts and strategies, where mutual understanding and plurality would replace the current patriarchal paradigms. 

This would result in nothing less than empowering men and women to be whole human beings again, and in turn bring wholeness and healing to divided societies. 

The ‘subaltern’ women of Africa need to, and are already creating their own language – but rather than a separate language and further alienation between the genders, this is emerging as a language of partnership with men in re-imagining and rebuilding a future together.





References:


Albrow, M., 1996, The Global Age: State and Society Beyond Modernity, Polity Press.

Alger, C.F., 1994, ‘A grassroots Approach to Life in Peace’, in Elias, R. and Turpin, J., Rethinking Peace, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, pp.282-289.

Ashendon, S. & Owen, D., 1999, Foucault contra Habermas, Sage Publications, London.

Behrendt, L., 1993, ‘Aboriginal Women and the White Lies of the Feminist Movement: Implications for Aboriginal Women in Rights Discourse’, The Australian Feminist Law Journal, Vol.1, pp.27-44.

Bendana, A., 2003, ‘What kind of Peace is Being Built? Critical Assessments from the South’, International Development Research Centre, http://www.transcend.org, accessed July 2005.

Brock-Utne, B., 1990, ‘Listen to women, for a change’, Peace Review 2:4, pp.205-209.

Bryson, L., 1992, ‘Women’s Welfare State’, Welfare and the State, Macmillan, London, pp.190-225.

Cohn, C., 1987, ‘Sex and Death in the Rational world of Defense Intellectuals’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, Summer 1987.


Cohn, C., Hill, F. & Ruddick, S., 2005, ‘The Relevance of gender for eliminating weapons of mass destruction’, Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue 80, Autumn, http://www.acronym.org.uk,

accessed September 26 1007.

Connell, R.W., 1995, ‘Men’s Bodies’, Masculinities, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, pp.45-66.

Cox, E., 1993, ‘The Economics of Mutual Support: A Feminist Approach’, in Rees, S (et al), eds, Beyond the Market, Pluto Press, Sydney, pp.270-276.


El-Bushra, J., 2003, ‘Women Building Peace: Sharing Know-How’, International Alert,

http://www.international-alert.org/women/, accessed September 26 2007

Fairclough, N., 1989, Language and Power, Longman, London.

Fishman, P.M., 1983, ‘Interaction: The work women do’, in Thorne, B., Kramarae, C. & Henley, N. (eds.), Language, Gender and SocietyNewbury HouseMass., pp.89-101.

Finn, J.L., 2001, ‘The Women of Villa Paula Jaraquemada: building community in Chile’s transition to democracy’, Community Development Journal, (36), 3, pp.183-197.

Fitzduff, M., 1999, ‘Changing History – Peacebuilding in Northern Ireland’, People Building Peace: 35 Inspiring Stories from around the world, European Centre for Conflict Prevention, Amsterdam, pp.87-103.

Helliwell, C., 2000, ‘”It’s only a penis” Rape, Feminism, and Difference’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, Vol.25, No.3 (Spring), pp.789-809.

Henry, K., and Lane, M., 2003, ‘Community development, neighbourhood conflict and peacebuilding’, New Community Quarterly, March (1), 1, pp.22-27.

Hock, D., 1999, Birth of the Chaordic Age, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, USA.

Hudson, H., 2006, ‘Human Security and Peacebuilding through a gender lens’, Danish Institute for International Studies, Working Paper 2006/37, http://www.dcism.dk/sw31644.asp, accessed 20 October 2007.

Jaggar, A.M., 1998, ‘Globalising Feminist Ethics’, Hypatia, Vol.13, Iss.2 (Spring), pp.7-53.

Jeong, H-W, 2000, ‘Feminist Understandings of Violence’, Peace and Conflict studies: an IntroductionAshgateEngland, pp.75-85.

Koen, K, 2006, ‘Claiming space: Reconfiguring women’s roles in post-conflict situations’, Institute for Security Studies, Paper 121, February 2006, http://www.iss.co.za, accessed 20 October 2007.

Lane, M., 1998, ‘Cultural Violence and Women’, Women in Welfare Education, No.3 edited by Irwin, J. (et al), pp.40-48.

Lane, M., 2003, ‘Gender and Peace: Implications for community development’, New Community Quarterly, Vol.1, No.3, Spring 2003, pp.33-36.

Lehman, K., 2003, ‘Protecting the Space Within’, in Rahnema, M. & Bawtree, V. (eds), The Post-Development Reader, Zed Books, London, pp.354-357.

Magwaza, T.,2003, ‘Counting the cost and listing the gains: is the UNSCR 1325 responsive to Africa challenges?’, Conflict Trends, 2003-3, pp.34-37, http://www.accord.org.za, accessed 20 October 2007.

Murphy-Lawless, J., 1988, ‘The Obstetric View of Feminine Identity: A Nineteenth Century Case History of the use of forceps in Ireland’, in Smith, A. (ed.), The Abortion Papers: Ireland, 1992, Attic Press, Dublin.

Muzaffar, C., 1999, From Human Rights to Human Dignity in van Ness, P. (ed.), ‘Debating Human Rights: Critical Essays from the United States and Asia’, Routledge, London, pp.25-31.

Nadjibulla, V., 2005, ‘NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security Statement to the Informal GA Civil Society Hearings’, http://www.peacewoman.org, accessed 26 September 2007.

Nagel, J., 1998, ‘Masculinity and nationalism: gender and sexuality in the making of nations’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 2:1, pp.224-269.

Nicholson, L., 1994, ‘Interpreting Gender’, Signs:Journal of Women in Culture and Society, Vol.20, No.1 (Autumn), pp.79-105.

Nussbaum, M., 2000, ‘Commentary’, Bounds of Justice, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp.324-335.

Ogunsanya, K., 2006, ‘Women and Elections in African Politics’, Conflict trends, 2006-2, pp.14-18, http://www.accord.org.za, accessed 20 October 2007.

O’Neill, O., 2000, ‘Justice, Gender and International Boundaries’, Bounds of Justice, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp.303-323.

Pankhurst, D., 2000, ‘Women, Gender and Peacebuilding’, Centre for Conflict Resolution, University of Bradford, Working Paper 5, http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/confres/papers, accessed 3 September 2007.

Perrigo, B., 1991, ‘Feminism and Peace’, in Woodhouse, T. (ed.), Peacemaking in a Troubled World, St. Martin’s Press, New York, pp.303-322.

Pillay, A., 2006, ‘Gender, Peace and Peacekeeping: Lessons from Southern Africa’, Institute for Security Studies Paper 128, October 2006, http://www.iss.co.za, accessed 20 October 2007.

Rai, S.M., 2002, ‘Gender and Development: Theoretical perspectives in context’, Gender and the Political Economy of Development, Polity Press, pp.44-85.

Reardon, B., 1990, ‘Feminist Concepts of Peace and Security’, in Smoker, P. (et al), A Reader in Peace Studies, Pergamon Press, London, pp.136-150.

Rees, S., 2003, Passion for Peace: Exercising Power CreativelyUniversity of New South Wales Press, Sydney.

Reimann, C., 2002, ‘”All You Need Is Love”…and What about Gender? Engendering Burton’s Human Needs Theory’, Centre for Conflict ResolutionUniversity of Bradford, Working Paper 10, http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/confres/papers, accessed 3 September 2007.

Ruiters, M., 2007, ‘Legislated gender sensitivity: SADC’s draft protocol on gender and development’, Institute for Global Dialogue, August 2007, 72, http://www.igd.org.za/, accessed 20 October 2007.

Sadie, Y. & Loots, E., 1998, ‘Gender, Development and Democracy’, Security, Development and Gender in Africa, Monograph no.27, August 1998, http://www.iss.co.za, accessed 20 October 2007.

Sen, A., 1999, ‘Women’s Agency and Social Change’, in Sen, A. (ed.), Development as Freedom, Oxford University Press, New York, pp.189-203.

Simmons, P., 2003, ‘Women in Development: A Threat to Liberation’, in Rahnema, M. & Bawtree, V. (eds), The Post-Development Reader, Zed Books, London, pp.244-253.

Strickland, R. & Duvvury, N., 2003, ‘Gender Equity and Peacebuilding; From Rhetoric to Reality: finding the way’, International Centre for Research on Womenhttp://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-61416-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html, accessed 20 October 2007.

Strong, G., 3 Nov. 2007, ‘One Woman’s War’, in Good Weekend, Sydney Morning Herald, pp.37-40.

UNIFEM, 2002, ‘Progress of the World’s Women 2002, Gender Equality and the Millennium Development Goals’, http://www.unifem.org, accessed March 2005.

Rehn, E. & Sirleaf, E., 2002, ‘Women, War and Peace: The Independent Experts’ Assessment on the impact of armed conflict on women and women’s role in Peace-building’, UNIFEM, www.undp.org/oslocentre/flagship/a2i_resourcesaccessed March 2005.

Vincent, L., 2003, ‘Current Discourse on the role of women in conflict prevention and conflict transformation: a critique’, Conflict Trends, 2003-3, pp.5-10, http://www.accord.org.za, accessed 20 October 2007.

Williams, H.E., 2006, ‘Women and Post-conflict Reconstruction in Africa’, Conflict Trends, 2006-1, pp.30-34, http://www.accord.org.za, accessed 20 October 2007.

Yunus, M., 1999, Peace is Freedom from Poverty, CPACS Occasional Paper No.99/3.

Peacebuilding in South Africa

Ten years after democratic elections

Introduction

Africa: the hopeless continent” (The Economist 13 May 2000:17)

South Africa has started on the long road to reconstruction and development, after the fall of apartheid and the birth of true democracy exactly ten years ago. Before that, the situation in the country seemed truly hopeless – with poverty, suffering and oppression imposed upon the black majority, by the white National Party in government for three decades. 

Many predicted that a change of government would be accompanied by civil war and result in another failed African State. However, South Africa defied these expectations, and continues to do so – making progress on many levels, albeit in baby steps. Africa need not be a hopeless continent, and South Africa is leading the way in proving what is possible - with a lot of vision and determination.

This essay will discuss the long-term prospects of the peace building process that was started in 1994 with the first democratic elections, and is therefore halfway through the last stage, according to Lederach’s theory – the Outcome, which is expected roughly twenty years after a complex political crisis (Lederach 1998:178). Lederach compartmentalises the Reconstruction process into different timeframes, as well as different areas to be addressed - from the Immediate Agenda to Transition and Transformation, and finally Reconciliation (Lederach 1998:178). 

Action is the immediate response to a Socio-Political crisis, lasting 2-6 months and usually involving emergency relief or military intervention (Lederach 1998:180). Following this is a period of roughly 2 years, during which preparations are usually made to hand-over to a new government, withdrawing foreign peacekeeping forces and other forms of intervention or proxy governance (Lederach 1998:179). 

The next 5-10 years usher in the Design phase, where new projects and policies are designed and implemented for economic, political, psychological and spiritual reconstruction of the nation (Lederach 1998:179). About twenty years after the crisis point, the outcome of these policies and external intervention should be reasonably clear - with the expected result being a more just, stable and peaceful country (Lederach 1998:179).

In the case of South Africa, as with many other countries, the theory did not fit the reality quite as neatly or predictably as many may have liked. Most of the phases lasted many more years than Lederach’s synopsis suggests as the norm, and the Outcome seems unlikely to have reached full fruition at the end of the twenty year period – only ten years away. 

However, this framework is useful in generalising about different periods of transition through which South Africa has progressed, and these will be discussed chronologically. A historical synopsis precedes the main task, of analysing the peace building process, as this is integral to gaining an understanding of the context and the unique challenges faced in South Africa. The moment of breakthrough and the surrounding “Action” phase is explained briefly, before discussing the past ten years of reconstruction – successes and failures.

The four main areas that require sustained attention during any transitional period – political, economic, socio-psychological and spiritual transformation – will all be analysed in detail when examining the Design period of the Transition. It is clear from the outset that many different actors were involved in bringing about the long-overdue political and social transformation – from the intervention of International organisations and donors, to the grassroots efforts of non-government organisations (NGOs) and Trade Unions, Churches and even key figures from the Business sector and Civil society.

While much credit is due to the many who influenced and implemented this [anti-apartheid] policy, the success of South Africa cannot be attributed to a coherent, well-designed, or well-executed American-crafted policy, but rather to the people of South Africa...[and] to a long struggle among different constituencies [and] interest groups” (Baker 2001:6).

The anti-apartheid struggle lasted for decades, and was a good example of what Saunders calls a web of different actors on different levels, interacting and mutually dependent – involving the whole “body politic”(Saunders in Lederach 1998:185). Many people in South Africa stepped forward to offer their negotiating expertise – from both sides of the racial divide - like Cyril Ramaphosa, a popular black labour union activist, and Roelf Meyer, from the much-hated National Party. However, this essay will highlight the absence of women in these proceedings, the negative impact that has had on current efforts towards peace building, and the need for women of South Africa to contribute towards the vision and the values of the “New” South Africa.

After some tentative suggestions and projections for the future, the essay concludes with the reminder that the task ahead for South Africa is a huge one – it seems insurmountable when viewed from the present status of the country – with limited resources, incomplete participation and the waning strength of its former leaders. 

However, the vision must be rekindled, the passion and the hope that carried the struggle through decades – this alone will ensure success and a brighter future for the “rainbow country” (Mail & Guardian 23 Dec 1999:6). Vision alone can motivate people to work, sacrifice, participate, and pay their dues - uniting the many races, cultures, and socio-economic people groups in pursuit of the common goal - peace!

1. History of the Conflict

1.1. Colonisation - First 250 years
South Africa had many precolonial waves of migration by various African tribes, but its official history began in 1652, with the Dutch VOC company landing at the Cape to use it as a supply station (Worden 2000: 7-9). Over the next few decades, a gradual pastoral invasion began - forcing the Khoikhoi inhabitants to move further inland (Worden 2000:9-10). By the 1760s pass laws were introduced for Khoikhoi who wished to reside or work in the new colony (Worden 2000:10,13,76). There were many clashes, mainly over alleged cattle theft on both sides, and eventually in 1799 a full-scale Xhosa rebellion broke out, which lasted until 1803 - when British intervention forced a surrender (Worden 2000:11). 

From the 1800s onwards, the Cape was a British colony, and many Industrial reforms were implemented, including extended pass laws and restrictions on ownership of property (Worden 2000:12-13). Meanwhile, by the 1820s, another wave of African migration called the Mfecane was taking place -from further North, to the area known today as Kwa-Zulu Natal, on the East coast (Worden 2000:15-16). Some speculations exist as to whether this was purely driven by tribal wars, or if the intrusion of slave-traders in Africa played a role in this turmoil (Worden 2000:17).

As British industrial needs had changed, relying on a more mobile labour force, in 1828 the pass laws for Khoikhoi were repealed, but Africans entering the colony still needed passes (Worden 2000:13,77). By 1834, slavery in the colony was also abolished (Worden 2000:13,77), and around the same time a few thousand Afrikaners, of Dutch descent, left the colony in what became known as the ‘Great Trek’ - and settled further North (Worden 2000:13-14). 

Many theories exist as to the reasons for this move, and conflicting accounts of the numbers of Afrikaners involved - but this event became the pivotal moment of the birth of an Afrikaner identity, as separate from the British, with strong religious and economic differences between them. In the 1850s, the Vaal area in the North was declared to be an Independent Boer state, after extensive fighting against the attempts of the British to expand their domain, with Native Africans joining the Afrikaans in their joint struggle against Imperialism (Worden 2000:18-19).

At the same time, elsewhere in the colony, the British started a series of Colonial Immigration schemes between 1849 and 1852 (Worden 2000:17), with Scottish, English and Irish among the many eager new settlers to arrive in Africa. In 1853, the Franchise was property-based (Worden 2000:78), and in the 1860s, to ensure political rights were restricted only to the new colonial settlers, further laws were introduced, preventing black voter registration (Worden 2000:81). To help establish the rapidly growing agricultural industry in Kwa-Zulu Natal, the British also imported thousands of Indian slaves in the 1860s (Worden 2000:17).

The economy changed dramatically after the discovery of diamonds in Kimberley in 1867, and with the further discovery of the richest deposits of gold in the world (Worden 2000:22). From 1870 onwards, the British tried to monopolise the resources of this divided country, by attempting to win the Boers’ co-operation in the Transvaal, and when this failed, they eventually annexed the province (Worden 2000:26). In 1879, however, the Zulu War, fought over boundary disputes in the crucial labour corridor between the East coast and the mines in the Transvaal, temporarily united the Afrikaners and the British against the Zulus (Worden 2000:26-27). The Zulu Nation were hard to subdue, and a truce was agreed upon finally, but civil conflict continued between the settlers and 'Natives' (Worden 2000:26). 

For this reason, the introduction of segregation in urban areas in the 1880s (Worden 2000:79) was merely a reflection of the fact that the various national and ethnic groups in the country were developing their own identities, growing further and further apart from each other. The 1899 to 1902 Anglo-Boer War was the final attempt by the British to establish control over the mineral-rich Transvaal, with the Afrikaners struggling for independence - cultural, political and economic (Worden 2000:28-35). Africans fought on both sides of the war, but their role in the war is not well-documented, although hundreds were killed in the British concentration camp, along with over 26,000 Afrikaner women and children (Worden 2000:33).

1.2 Nonviolent Protest - 50 years
Industrialism and the protection of mining interests were the main motivation behind the political union of the Afrikaner states with the British colonies in 1910, forming the British Union of South Africa (Worden 2000:35-36). The white people felt the need for unity against the threat of black invasion outweighed other considerations. Many racist laws were passed in the next few decades, and racism was entrenched in the constitution, despite the efforts of leading black politicians (Worden 2000:35). The 1905 School Board Act was already in place, ensuring separate education systems for blacks, whites and Indians, and from 1906 to 1914, Indians had protested other restrictions, under Gandhi’s leadership (Worden 2000:96). 

The first meeting of the South African Native National Congress (SANNC), later to become the ANC, took place in Bloemfontein in 1912 to plan nonviolent campaigns against the exclusion of black people from business and politics (Worden 2000:92). The 1920s saw an intensification of racism however, with the Mixed Marriages Act (Worden 2000:87) and in 1926 the Mines Act (Worden 2000:84). At the same time, between 1915 and 1929, there was a concerted move by Afrikaner identity groups to build a strong cultural identity for themselves and secure a parliamentary majority (Worden 2000:100-103).

During the 1930s Depression, there was no relief for black people, who were suffering even higher rates of unemployment and poverty than the white population (Worden 2000:69). The 1932 Native Service Contract Act was economically motivated, and forced black residents on white farmlands to pay taxes or work for the farmers - and they were not allowed to leave without written permission (Worden 2000:68). 

Other laws, like the 1936 Native Trust and Land Act, marked the beginning of what later became the homelands policy of the 1960s - an attempt to enforce separate development of black people in unwanted sections of the country (Worden 2000:68,124-125). During the depression years and well into the 1940s, there was increased urbanisation of the black population, dispossessed of their land and unable to survive independently any longer (Worden 2000:69). 

Religious movements like the Zionists flourished (Worden 2000:71), as well as the birth of the distinctive township or “Marabi” culture (Worden 2000:71) and the “stokvel” practice of pooling resources to look after people in one’s neighbourhood (Worden 2000:71). These were all attempts by black people to regain their sense of identity and solidarity, in a radically different environment. 

During this time, women who had enjoyed financial independence by selling home-brewed beer from their homes - called “shebeens” - mounted a series of attacks on the government-sponsored beerhalls in the townships (Worden 2000:72) - making them the first known activists. Other protests followed in the 1940s, with labour unions flexing their muscles and causing considerable alarm amongst the white population due to the concerns of capitalists in the mining industry especially (Worden 2000:72-73).

The white perception of a growing “swart gevaar” or black peril (Worden 2000:73), led to the publication in 1946 of the Sauer Report by the National Party - later recognised as the blueprint of “apartheid” (Worden 2000:104). “Apartheid” as it was later known, was a comprehensive framework of policies and laws, to ensure total segregation of the races, and separate, unequal, development within the nation, ensuring white domination of the black majority in the country. 

The 1950 Group Areas Act was officially the first of these laws, demarcating separate areas of residence for the different races that were to be enforced (Worden 2000:108). Then followed the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, the Bantu Education Act (Worden 2000:108) and in 1954 the Natives Resettlement Act (Worden 2000:108). 

Due to pressure from the mining industry again, which required a more flexible labour force, in 1952 the government passed the Abolition of Passes Act (Worden 2000:110). In opposition to the policies of the National Party, in 1953 the Liberal Party was founded (Worden 2000:89), and in 1955 delegates from a few political parties met for discussions that produced the Freedom Charter - a document declaring their belief that: “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of the people...” (Worden 2000:119).


1.3 Intensified Action - 25 years
In 1960, the tragic Sharpeville Massacre, in which 69 unarmed people were killed, and many more wounded, resulted in international condemnation (Worden 2000:121). In the aftermath of this event, a new form of Black Consciousness was born, with the charismatic leader, Steve Biko as its spokesman (Worden 2000:131-132). 

Also, in 1961 the ANC abandoned its nonviolent tactics after much debate, and started the armed struggle - its new military wing was composed of the more radical youth, and called “Umkhonto we Sizwe” or Spear of the Nation (Worden 2000:129130). From the 1970s onwards, school riots were frequent (Worden 2000:134-135), and between 1973 and 1976 labour disputes and strikes were so common that the mining industry once more pressured the government for decisive action (Worden 2000:134-135). 

At the same time, the UN expelled South Africa from its General Assembly meetings in 1974, in what the government at the time viewed as an arbitrary and illegal move (Bureau for Information 1987:41). In 1977, the Security Council also imposed a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa (Bureau for Information 1987:41). However foreign investment continued to climb steadily, and reached R66 988 million in 1987, with US companies being the single biggest investors (Bureau for Information 1987:62).

Reacting to this international isolation, and the pressure to preserve mining interests in the country, between 1979 and 1984 the government adopted a series of policies which came to be known collectively as ‘Total Strategy’ (Worden 2000:139). This approach included military operations across the border, harsh laws against union membership and actions, and the introduction in 1983 of a Tricameral Constitution. This was aimed at winning broader support for a slightly modified form of apartheid - providing separate representation for white, coloured and Indian people, but not the 75 per cent black majority (Worden 2000:140-150). 

However, this was unsuccessful, and resulted in more violent protests - from about 1985 the clashes sparked by forced squatter removals were shown almost daily in America, as the international media focused on South Africa, and joined activists around the world in pressuring the South African government to set Mandela free (Baker 2004:87). 

For decades, the interests of international business had prevented countries, especially the USA, from taking decisive action against the South African government in the interests of human rights - “there were 284 US corporations in South Africa in 1984...billions were also invested in mutual funds and other South African securities” (Baker 2004:91). By 1987, however, Foreign Investment had shown a significant decline, which the government stubbornly attributed to “socio-political developments ...[and] a deterioration of overseas perceptions [which are] misguided and distorted” (Bureau for Information 1987:62).

2. Stalemate and Breakthrough - Preparation - 10 years
In 1984, the largest Afrikaner church, Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk (NGK) issued a statement against apartheid, calling on its members to repent with “humility and sorrow” (Welsh 2000:485). The moderator of the NGK’s Western Synod, proclaimed:

there is no such thing as white superiority or black inferiority...all people are equal before God...there may not be under any circumstances a political policy based on oppression, discrimination and exploitation...the task of the church is to protest against unjust laws.” (Welsh 2000:485)

Meanwhile, the ANC had realised that the socialism in which it was rooted would not aid its cause internationally, and published its “Constitutional Guidelines for a Democratic Society” in 1988 (Welsh 2000:494-495). This enabled them to win the support of the Business community, who firmly opposed Apartheid (Welsh 2000:494-495). Regular meetings had been held since 1985 between Business leaders and ANC representatives like Thabo Mbeki (Welsh 2000:495).

PW Botha declared in 1985 that Mandela could be released, conditional on his abandonment of political activism, but an indignant Mandela replied:

What freedom am I being offered while the organisation of the people remains banned? What freedom am I being offered when I may be arrested on a pass offence? What freedom am I being offered to live my life as a family with my dear wife who remains in banishment in Brandfort? ...What freedom am I being offered when my very South African citizenship is not respected? Only free men can negotiate. ..I cannot and will not give any undertaking at a time when I and you, the people, are not free” (Welsh 2000:498).

In 1989, Mandela wrote a letter to PW Botha, urging him to meet and “negotiate an effective political settlement” (Welsh 2000:498). Later that year, the meeting took place, but PW Botha was on his way out of office, and it would be up to FW de Klerk to take on the challenge of negotiating a way forward for the country (Welsh 2000:499). 

The UN adopted the Harare Declaration, issued by the ANC, later that year, which spelled out steps to be taken by the South African government to ensure the lifting of sanctions (Welsh 2000:498-499). In 1990 de Klerk surprised everyone with his announcement at the opening of parliament in February 1990 that the ANC, PAC and Communist parties were to be unbanned, and political prisoners would be released - including Mandela, unconditionally (Welsh 2000:499).

In 1991 all Apartheid legislation was repealed - paving the way to earnest multi-party negotiations (Worden 2000:155). However, violence errupted all over the country in the next few months, mostly between ANC and Inkhata supporters, but accusations of government involvement abounded on all sides (Worden 2000:157-159, 508-509). When the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) negotiations started, de Klerk tried to ensure some form of protection of minority rights in the new constitution - supported by both Afrikaners and Zulus, under Buthelezi, who refused even to attend the talks - but these hopes did not materialise (Welsh 2000:505,511). 

However, a “joint intervention” by the South African Council of Churches, the Consultative Business Movement, the Labour Unions, and most major Political Parties, ensured the beginning of a peace process, with its first step the signing of the National Peace Accord in 1991 (Eloff 1998:2). A Referendum was held in 1992, and the white population showed their support for the continuation of de Klerk’s reforms by a 69 per cent majority (Welsh 2000:511).

Even though the Nationalist government was by no means a “defeated enemy”, as Joe Slovo acknowledged (Welsh 2000:512) - with a powerful army and intelligence service at its disposal - the violence that interrupted the CODESA talks over the following months, spurred all participants on to finding a solution to the stalemate before the country was reduced to a bloodbath (Welsh 2000:512-513). 

The result of this was meaningful compromises on all sides (Worden 2000:159,161). Ultimately, these fora resulted in a new interim constitution and a transitional executive authority, with agreement to hold open elections (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:265). However the assassination of the leader of the Communist Party, Chris Hani in 1993 almost derailed these efforts (Welsh 2000:513). It took a moving speech from Mandela that same day, to unite South Africans in their desire for a peaceful transition–

Tonight, I am reaching out to every single South African, black and white, from the very depth of my being...our whole nation now teeters on the brink of disaster...Now is the time for all South Africans to stand together against those who, from any quarter, wish to destroy what Chris Hani gave his life for - the freedom of all of us” (Welsh 2000:513).

The 1994 elections were held in “uninterrupted calm” (Welsh 2000:517), to the surprise of the International community and South Africans alike, and were declared to be “substantially fair” by external observers (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:267). However, more than 15,000 people had been killed in political violence in the four years since Mandela’s release (Welsh 2000:517). Tutu later wrote of the elections:

What a profound scientific discovery it was for the whites that blacks, coloureds and indians were in fact human beings, who had the same aspirations as they did...The black person entered the booth one person and emerged on the other side a new, transfigured one. She entered weighed down by the anguish and burden of oppression...She reappeared knowing she was free, walking away with her head held high...How do you describe it to someone who was born in freedom? ...The white person entered the voting booth burdened by the guilt at having enjoyed the fruits of oppression and injustice. He too, emerged as somebody new, somebody transfigured, from whom a burden had been lifted...” (Hoppers 2000:3).

3. Transition - Reconstruction & Reconciliation

3.1 Design - first 10 years (1994-2003)
3.1.1. Socio-Political Reform
a) Constitutional reform and human rights
In its favour, South Africa’s physical infrastructure, and its production, communications, legal and banking systems were not completely shattered by the collapse of apartheid, and in that sense there was less to rebuild than most countries face after a socio-political crisis (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:261). Since 1994, the country’s “democratic roots are institutionalised...The South African government adheres to constitutional processes, boasts a vibrant press, has a strong civil society, and sustains an energetic private sector that is expanding beyond its own borders” (Baker 2004:99).

However, with the ANC now controlling a two-thirds majority in the government, and the weakening of Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) due to lack of funding after the collapse of apartheid, it has been observed that “politics for most South Africans increasingly boils down to making their cross every five years” (Mail & Guardian 4 Feb 2003:2). Also, many legislated changes have yet to be implemented - for example the equality courts had only been in operation for six months by the end of 2003, and they were still relatively unknown, with the long-awaited unit “that will trace fathers who default on maintenance payments” as legislated, still to materialise (Mail & Guardian 19 Dec 2003:11).

b) Labour rights
One of the first new pieces of legislation, the Labour Act, ensured that black workers’ rights were clearly stated and protected, with union negotiations and labour tribunals to resolve disputes (Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration 1994:1). Further obligations on companies in the New South Africa, include:

employment equity, skills development, HIV/AIDS education and treatment, black economic empowerment, and, coming soon, mineral royalties in the mining industry - accused by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of having provided the blueprint for ‘grand apartheid’” (Mail & Guardian 18 April 2003:1).

However, there are also some positive incentives at the grassroots level to empower people to seize the new opportunities available. One group of former development workers started a monthly newspaper in 1996, called Big News, which is distributed for free, and sees its “editorial mission” as providing:

a sense of solidarity to those trying to gain access to a world that has historically excluded them...[and] aims to provide the vital role model needed by new business owners and to give information on management skills and opportunities” (Mail & Guardian 26 Apr 2002:1).


c) Demilitarising/ Crime reduction
The internally displaced and families that were forcibly separated, would potentially be resettled, and the youth brought back into education and work programmes, if the TRC’s Reparations committee proposals are followed (South African Department of Justice Reparations Act 1995:9). However, money has for so long been “diverted from social use to weapons, deepening inequity, feeding violence, and necessitating more repression...[a] vicious cycle”, (Adelson 2000:3), that the task of Demilitarising the culture of violence seems beyond reach at this stage. Mbeki’s challenges upon election to the Presidency in 1999–

from wiping out poverty to eliminating crime and dealing with the world’s fastest-growing HIV/AIDS crisis - were quite different [from Mandela’s], having less to do with securing human rights for blacks than with consolidating the democratic transition and making human rights meaningful in economic and social terms” (Baker 2004:98).

It is interesting to note that South Africa’s RDP Fund was R12,5 billion over five years (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:272), and at the end of 2003 had about R2,5-billion available, while the government “committed South Africa to spending between R30-billion and R60-billion (depending on who you speak to) on the arms deal” (Mail & Guardian 18 April 2003:2). 

This has caused a huge outcry in the media, except among those who do “not want to be seen to be criticising this government as their access to power and resources is dependent on supporting the agenda of this government...[however] blaming the current disillusionment of blacks mainly on racism and racist attitudes is to feed into the racial stereotyping of whites and to absolve government of all responsibility” (Mail & Guardian 5 Jan 2001: 1).

Furthermore, “crime is the soft underbelly of the RDP” (Bratton & Landsberg 1999: 298), with alarming figures that scare away foreign investors, and cause many well-educated South Africans to migrate - taking their much-needed skills with them. International donors have been hesitant to invest in strengthening the security institutions - perhaps because these were used so oppressively during the apartheid years (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:277), but this is an essential part of the peace-building process that has been neglected.

d) Participation
One of the major obstacles to peace building in South Africa, is the rebelliousness and “culture of non-payment” (Bratton & Landsberg 1999: 289), which was encouraged during the apartheid years, when the ANC leaders “tapped into the energy of the ‘youth bulge’ in the black population, youngsters who had grown up under rigid apartheid and faced a grim future in a deteriorating economy in which they were marginalised. Impatient with the docility of their parents and disdainful of the inferior black educational system, they confronted authorities as no other generation had during months of unrest that made the black townships ‘ungovernable’” (Baker 2004:86). Obeying the law, attending classes and paying for services under an apartheid government became synonymous with betraying the cause, and was punishable by death (Welsh 2000:506).

This “lost generation”, not only the “11,000 returning ex-combatants of the ANC’s armed wing” (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:262) now have to learn how to fit into society peacefully again, and contribute to rebuilding the country by being dutiful and respectful citizens. Their identity needs to be reshaped, and prospects for useful employment encouraged, so that they do not turn to crime and intimidation to survive - as many already have (Bratton & Landsberg 1999: 298). During the apartheid years, “the campaigns they organised, the bus boycotts...gave them something, their identity. Instead of being useless black children they were comrades. Their communities had a role for them” (Mail & Guardian 13 Nov 1998:2).

Nelson Mandela himself has walked the uneasy path to spiritual maturity, and “evolved from being a fiery leader of the youth wing of the ANC to a voice of racial reconciliation” (Baker 2004:86). Another consideration though, is the fact that many people have simply burnt out, after years of personal sacrifice for the cause, and since the fall of apartheid, most former activists (including the recently retired Mandela) are pursuing fulfillment through family welfare, employment and income - they are “no longer willing to bear the costs of permanent political mobilisation” (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:296).

e) Local Authorities
At the same time, the legitimacy of local-level authorities needs to be re-established in the eyes of the township community (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:262). Especially important are the current generation of youth, who are impatient and frustrated, as they have seen no immediate improvement in the quality of their lives, and many have turned to drugs and alcohol, as they feel powerless - “they were never consulted” by the architects of the new democracy (Mail & Guardian 16 Jan 2004:2). 

In the township of Kliptown, where the Freedom Charter was signed in 1955, there are still no schools - the youth are mostly unemployed, with no parks or sportsgrounds, and no taxi fare to even leave the settlement (Mail & Guardian 1 Mar 2004:1). 

The teenage pregnancy and AIDS figures are high, and the growing numbers of destitute children are heart-breaking (Mail & Guardian 1 Mar 2004:1). The elderly seem to be under the same cloud of despair and disillusionment in the townships - one lady commented sadly, “I would really like to stay here [in Kwa Mashu township]. But I don’t know whether there is anything to be hopeful of in this world. The devil is everywhere” (Mail & Guardian 16 Jan 2004:3).

3.1.2. Socio-Economic Reconstruction
Phase 1 - The Reconstruction and Development Programme
Mandela launched the White Paper for the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) in 1994 by declaring:

My Government’s commitment to create a people-centred society of liberty binds us to the pursuit of the goals of freedom from want, freedom from hunger, freedom from deprivation, freedom from ignorance, freedom from suppression and freedom from fear. These freedoms are fundamental to the guarantee of human dignity...the justification and the purpose of the Reconstruction and Development Programme, without which it would lose all legitimacy” (RDP White Paper 1994:1)

The RDP was seen as:

a unique opportunity to bring about renewal, peace, prosperity, reconciliation and stability. It is the product of ongoing consultation and it enjoys widespread support from all sections of our society” (RDP White Paper 1994:1).

One of the main ideals focused on was for the RDP to be “people-driven”, with “a vibrant civil society”, “credible and effective Local Government”, “human resource and capacity development”, and the integral involvement of mass organisations and trade unions (RDP White Paper 1994:53). NGOs were also included in this vision of co-operation across all sectors of society - with possible government funding “based on their role in taking forward the RDP” (RDP White Paper 1994:50). 

The RDP was an attempt at holistic development, “recognising the interconnectedness of development, peace and security, and aiming at transformation...the embodiment of a set of values, rather than a collection of projects” (Adelson 2000:7).

Capacity building received special attention in the RDP discussion paper, with Presidential Projects proposed to explore “path-breaking approaches to consultation, participation and local control” (RDP White Paper 1994:49). Interestingly, women were to be “targeted as beneficiaries” (RDP White Paper 1994:49). There was also an initiative to “spearhead a broader empowerment programme for women, taking into account that women often represent the poorest, most exploited and most marginalised sector of our society” (RDP White Paper 1994:51). 

A rural development policy was planned, in consultation with rural people and stakeholders, with particular attention being given to “small-scale agricultural producers by ensuring access to land, appropriate markets, credit facilities, training and support” (RDP White Paper 1994:51). 

Comprehensive programmes were intended for the integration of disabled people and the removal of discriminatory practices against them, with special attention being given to “mental illness arising from trauma and violence” (RDP White Paper 1994:52). 

The needs of young people were to be addressed as well, as “our country’s most important resource” - including the “backlog in education and training, job creation and recreation” (RDP White Paper 1994:52). 

Amongst the many lead projects listed in the White Paper were - “Primary School Nutrition Scheme”, “Rural Water Provision”, “Land Reform Pilots”, “Land Restitution”, “Urban Infrastructure Investment Planning Team”, “National Urban Reconstruction and Housing Agency”, “National Literacy Programme”, “Small-Scale Farmer Development”, “Culture of Learning”, “Free Health Care”, “Clinic Building”, and “AIDS Awareness and Prevention Campaign” (RDP White Paper 1994:55-58).

In the first five years of democracy, 3 million people gained access to water, 2 million households received electricity, and over 5 million children received health care and primary school nutrition (Adelson 2000:10). The targets set for the RDP included a million new homes by 1999, “clean water, sanitation and health care for all” and “redistribution of 30 per cent of the country’s farmland” (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:268). 

The unrealistic nature of these targets was soon apparent, however, as only 10 000 houses were in fact built in the first year, 1995, and by 1998, only 60 per cent of the target were under construction (Bratton & Landsberg 1999: 288). By 1997, the RDP was widely known to have failed in delivering the expected economic development (Worden 2000:165) - the South African market had opened up “in an international business environment in which, after the fall of communism, there was a host of newly emerging alternative markets...with investors wary of the powerful labour unions, high crime rates, taxes, and an HIV/AIDS infection rate that rivalled that of any other country...” (Baker 2004:99).

Phase 2 - GEAR
In 1996, the government announced a change of course - “a self-imposed structural adjustment program known as Growth, Employment, and Redistribution (GEAR), which sought to generate jobs through foreign private investment” (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:260). This program replaced the RDP and aimed for “export-led growth, and annual GDP growth rate of at least 6 per cent...and the privatisation or streamlining of public agencies” - clearly a huge leap towards embracing neoliberal policies (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:269). By 2003, the economy had grown on average by 2,7 per cent over the previous decade - which would still mean a predicted 29 per cent unemployment rate by 2014 (Mail & Guardian 8 Aug 2003:1).

In 2002, however, 45 per cent of schools still had no electricity, 27 per cent lacked clean water, and 66 per cent had inadequate sanitation - 12 per cent of these had none (Mail & Guardian 12 Jul 2002:1). Other major issues included “undelivered textbooks, underspent budgets, violence in schools...” (Mail & Guardian 12 Jul 2002:1). By 2003, matriculation results had improved from only 47 pre cent pass rate in 1997 (Bratton & Landsberg 1999: 299), to 69 per cent (Mail & Guardian 19 Dec 2003:3). However,

when children have to walk 20km to get to school, when an unsanitary learning environment causes an outbreak of skin rashes, when hunger pangs prevent pupils from concentrating, when girls can no longer endure the sexual advances of their teachers and stop attending school, then policy alone - however progressive - is not enough” (Mail & Guardian 12 Jul 2002:1).

Small-scale agriculture has been encouraged by the introduction of regulation and government intervention to favour black farmers and control food prices (Mail & Guardian 14 Jun 2002:1). However, the problems preventing these incentives from generating a thriving industry, run much deeper–

What is possible with a little land, waste water and composting is astonishing. Given the combination of unemployment, food, poverty, nutritional needs and relatively large unused gardens in townships here...it seems obvious what should happen. Yet it doesn’t ...have all the technical concerns been addresses, without cultural and perceptual blockages being ironed out? Is it a problem of ownership of the solution, or have people just become too disconnected with the land?” (Madhvani 2003:3).

In 2003, 5 million people in South Africa still lacked access to basic water supply, and 18 million people were living without adequate sanitation (Mail & Guardian 19 Dec 2003:9). It has become glaringly apparent that in the areas of capacity-building and policy-making, South Africa has developed a thriving industry of experts - but as far as the actual delivery of material goods and services, programmes are not succeeding (Bratton & Landsberg 1999: 289). 

The ANC’s uncomfortable position in the first decade of democracy, is that it is “seeking to deliver an expanded range of services even as it radically revises the structure and composition of the state. This juggling act has been aptly likened to ‘moving the furniture into a new house before you have finished building it’” (Bratton & Landsberg 1999: 298).

Future Challenges - Corruption
Allegations of ANC corruption, and the unfathomable support given to Mugabe in Zimbabwe despite his rigged elections and lawless land seizures, have “tarnished the image of South Africa as a government wedded to human rights and good governance” (Baker 2004:99). The issue is very much tied up with old loyalties though, like old partners in the struggle against white domination - and corruption is often only a few steps away from the meeting of family obligations, which is such an important part of African custom (Korten 1990:52). Winnie Madikizela-Mandela and Allan Boesak were both convicted of serious crimes, including fraud, theft and kidnapping, and still retained the support and adulation of the masses - because they are viewed as legends of the struggle (Woods 2003:198-199). 

However, in a country where millions live lives of poverty and suffering, such selfish greed is hard to excuse - power is a sacred gift:

not ...a club to be used in the service of personal aggrandisement, but rather as a gift to be held in stewardship to the service of the community and the human and spiritual fulfillment of all people - especially the powerless” (Korten 1990:168).

3.1.3. Socio-Psychological and Cultural Rebuilding
When the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) started in 1995 (Worden 2000:166-167), the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, proclaimed its goals to be:

National unity, the well-being of all South African citizens and peace ...reconciliation between people of South Africa and the reconstruction of society...there is a need for understanding but not vengeance, a need for reparation but not for retaliation, a need for ubuntu but not for victimisation” (South African Department of Justice Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 1995:1).

South Africa could not follow the pattern of the Nuremberg trials, as “it had to balance the requirements of justice, accountability, stability, peace and reconciliation” (Hoppers 2000:5). The Commission encouraged accountability, and those who did not admit to their crimes were not granted amnesty (Hoppers 2000:5). The Commissioners were not only hearing evidence and testimonies, but encouraging truth, recognition and compassion - vital steps towards restoring the body politic (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:1). The suffering and sacrifices of at least 30 years of conflict and struggle was publicly recorded and acknowledged, with 21 000 witnesses (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:1) contributing to this cathartic release of a Nation (Welsh 2000:524).

Forgiveness has to begin with memory...historical truth is not the whole of justice, but it is the indispensable beginning...” (Shriver & Lean 2001:1).

However, not all sectors of society responded favourably to the TRC hearings, or the final report, published in - the extreme right-wing Afrikaners of the AWB, as well as the black extremists in the PAC, refused to claim amnesty by fully disclosing their past deeds, so many were sentenced to serve prison sentences. de Klerk’s repeatedly stated that he “accepted overall responsibility for the period of his leadership and, together with the Cabinet and the State Security Council, accepted joint responsibility for all the decisions that they took and the instructions that they gave...” (Mail & Guardian 9 May 2003:1).

Yet he was mercilessly targetted by the media and the TRC. The government of National Unity split in 1996, when the New National Party left in protest at the treatment of former President FW de Klerk by the commission (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:2).

More surprisingly, the ANC government reacted with horror when the commission passed judgement on ANC violations of human rights during the years of struggle - such as the use of torture in its detention camps, and the planting of bombs (Woods 2003:194) - condemning them as firmly as they had criticised the NP government’s oppressive tactics (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:2). It is even suggested that the reason the ANC is dragging its heals in paying the recommended reparations to those the TRC determined were victims of human rights violations, is due to Mbeki’s resentment towards this “attack” (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:2). This shirking of responsibility contradicts the spirit in which the Reparations Act was written–

the present government has accepted that it must deal with the things the previous government did and that it must therefore take responsibility for reparation” (South African Department of Justice Reparations Act 1995:1).

By 2003, the government was calling on all South Africans to:

follow their conscience and contribute to the President’s Fund, which will pay the one-off reparation grants of R30 000 to about 22,000 survivors of gross human rights abuses” (Mail & Guardian 17 April 2003:2).

Earlier proposals by the TRC to impose a wealth tax on businesses to provide funds for reparations, were roundly rejected by Mbeki (17 April 2003:1-2), in a surprising move that many feel showed the government’s true loyalties as being “focused on the ideological fundamentals of the new order: a market economy, black empowerment and poverty alleviation - though not erradication” (Mail & Guardian 25 April 2003:2). 

However, another way of looking at it is that the government is “caught between the requirements of the international community, and the social demands of the mass of the people. All these represent the tension between reconciliation and social justice, to the point where they become contradictory, and even irreconcilable” (Hoppers 2000:7).

3.1.4. Spiritual Healing/ Reconciliation Journey
a) Traditional African Justice
Restorative Justice has been discussed by many, including Archbishop Desmond Tutu, as the preferable alternative to Retributive Justice, where “the offender pays his (or her) debt to society, but victims are left out of the equation. Moreover, imprisonment undoubtedly has a dehumanising effect on inmates, who are then almost certain to reoffend (if they do not die of AIDS)” (Douglas 2004:2).

Traditional African concepts of Justice and peace building often involve the tribal or village elders in communal “dialogue, meditation, relationship and community-based approaches”, with “reconciliation and forgiveness...the most important factor of good neighbourliness” (Lutheranworld 2002:1). Elders usually establish the root causes of the conflict at a gathering of the whole village, and a punishment is then carefully prescribed, and evaluated in terms of its ability to establish harmony and peace (Lutheranworld 2002:2). In most cases, the restoration of relationships in the community is the key focus, and in some parts of Africa this is reinforced by closing the proceedings with “beer ...shared by both parties and the council of elders, followed by a feast” (Lutheranworld 2002:2). In addition, “rituals and taboos have been put in place to protect the sanctity of life and the dignity of human beings” (Lutheranworld 2002:2).

b) Ubuntu
There is much discussion in the New South Africa of “Ubuntu” - “A person is a person through other people” (Adelson 2000:5). This African value stresses relationship and community, “mutual identification, empathy and respect for all” (Adelson 2000:5).

A person is said to have ‘ubuntu’ if they are caring, generous, hospitable and compassionate. It means that my humanity is caught up and is inextricably bound in yours - in other words, we belong in a bundle of life...I am human because I belong. Harmony, friendliness and community are the greatest good” (Hoppers 2000:5).

However, the reality is that most white South Africans are not included in this idealistic vision - a recent poll by the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation revealed that 61 per cent “believe that their children have little future in their own country” (Mail & Guardian 9 May 2003:2). One of the main reasons for this insecurity in the white community is the picture painted, by the government, the TRC and some media voices, that:

whites...should not really be viewed as the co-creators of the new South Africa with an honourable place at the table. Instead, they should be seen as a discredited and unjustifiably privileged minority whose only proper role in the new South Africa should be as supplicants for forgiveness and payers of reparations...This is deeply regrettable because it robs white South Africans of the feeling of belonging and enthusiastic participation that they felt in the heady days of 1994” (Mail & Guardian 9 May 2003:2).

c) Culture of Inclusion
These views feed on stereotypes of black people in the anti-apartheid struggle being essentially good, “because their cause was just”, while white people were all “more or less evil” - despite the 69 per cent vote in favour of reform in the referendum of 1991 (Mail & Guardian 9 May 2003:2). There were also many examples of white people fighting apartheid in nonviolent ways, for example the Black Sash protests by groups of middle-class women, who stood in silence outside Parliament buildings, wearing black sashes to show solidarity with their fellow South Africans who had no voice in the nation’s government (Welsh 2000:452). 

During the black consciousness movement of the 1960s, Biko eloquently voiced the need for inclusion - “the black man must reject all value systems that seek to make him a foreigner in the country of his birth and reduce his basic human dignity” (Mail & Guardian 23 Dec 1999:5). The current situation in South Africa has similar echoes of this sentiment, in reverse - for white people are now being made to feel unwelcome in the land of their birth. African writer and psychologist, N Chabani Manganyi, unveiled the depth of this divide–

“'the question of impunity is a big issue. There’s a psychological hurdle where people are supposed to move on in terms of change. On a superficial level, it’s working. But there’s a grim silence in society about what each one of us is really going through.’ The TRC had a strong ethos of reconciliation, understandably...but the leaders of the negotiation process had ‘frozen the outer limits of what was possible, speakable’” (Mail & Guardian 29 April 2004:3).

d) Humour
Humour has long been known to be beneficial and uplifting, but recent theories of the “usefulness of humour” have also pointed to its use in adapting to uncomfortable and even oppressive situations, as a means of channeling our emotions in a controllable and inoffensive manner, and enabling people to raise ‘taboo’ topics safely, or even to discuss important cultural truths with foreigners, and without risking reprisals from oppressive governments (Williams 2001:492-495). 

Humility contributes to humour and to a realisation that a willingness to make concessions is a sign of strength not weakness. In such negotiations the prospect of recovering our humanity can be realised” (Tutu 2003:9). Humour can be used to defuse tensions and re-establish relationship with the community (Rees 2003:281). 

South Africans, like most nations, have their own unique sense of humour - and the black people are especially jovial and light-hearted, considering the suffering they have experienced. “Jokes are also a way to reassert one’s humanity in the face of the inhuman” (Williams 2001:493), and this is perhaps one of the most striking and memorable aspects of the African character - their huge smiles, love of music, singing, dancing and joking, no matter how harsh the daily realities of African life. 

During Nelson Mandela’s trial in 1963, the courtrooms were filled with ANC supporters “singing and chanting” (Rees 2003:172). Humour also establishes common ground between people, often cutting across cultural barriers, and bringing out a child-like playfulness and self-deprecation -essential to counter cynicism in negotiations. Many examples of this attempt to encourage mutual understanding already exist in South Africa - the Madam & Eve cartoons have been quietly commenting on South African society since the decline of apartheid, and throughout the first decade of democracy.

3.2 From Design to Outcome - 2004 and beyond
3.2.1 Identity and the African Renaissance
In 2004, the elections were scheduled for April 14th, “the tenth anniversary of democracy” - which was seen by most South Africans as an attempt to:

make best use of this amazing historical backdrop to distract from more annoying current difficulties, such as AIDS, unemployment, corruption, political scandals and incompetence...all the usual suspects” (Madhvani 2004:3).

It has been pointed out that a country in transition must give the new government some leeway, and:

should (initially at least) be indulgent of shortcomings...[however] ten years seems more than adequate for the end of government probation. South Africans can now raise the bar for government performance and develop zero tolerance for sloppiness among public officials” (Mail & Guardian 9 Jan 2004:3).

In a review of the Minister of Public Service in 2003, it was concluded that “after ten years of capacity development programmes the minister needs to take a close look at why the public service still cannot take care of its own needs” - relying instead on costly outside consultants (Mail & Guardian 19 Dec 2003:9). As one foreign mission worker with the Quakers observed wryly,

This antipathy to work is a South African disease, and corruption and dishonesty are rife...Officials, generally, are idle, corrupt, and rude - regardless of racial origin...[and] a white foreigner is expected to give all the time, and never to receive...” (Douglas 2003:1-2).

Yet Mbeki has repeatedly declared the birth of an “African Renaissance...used to mean many things, some contradictory, but all refer to reclamation of a past destroyed by history, and all project into a future of African reemergence and reassertion - cultural, economic and political” (Adelson 2000:6).

The government also expressed stern disapproval of the international lawsuits being filed against multinational companies “that profited from apartheid”, preferring instead to engage with the business sector in a series of talks to “determine how it could best contribute to reconstruction” (Mail & Guardian 17 April 2003:1). Mbeki condemned the TRC’s recommendations to pursue legal settlements, and the Minister of Trade and Industry criticised the legal proceedings as “ the...unsound law...of another land to undermine our sovereign right to settle our past and build our future as we see fit” (Mail & Guardian 17 April 2003:2). 

However, multi-billion dollar class actions have been brought against 21 international companies by Jubilee 2000 and Khulumani, after “four years of lobbying foreign banks to write off apartheid debt as a form of reparation” failed (Mail & Guardian 17 April 2003:2). Mbeki’s protests are reminiscent of Steve Biko’s message in the 1960’s that “We must stop looking to the white man to give us something...We have to create our own future!” (Woods 2003:230).

Furthermore, the Mbeki government seems uncomfortable when faced with newly-empowered critics of government policy, exercising their democratic right to comment and protest–

It tends to express derision for those who do not share its view of the world...[and] can be overly sensitive and defensive about the cacophony that is often our democracy” (Mail & Guardian 25 April 2003:2).

Mbeki has often been cited in the press, making paranoid accusations and oblique references to “some in our country” who are said to be “actively promoting the failure of the democratic project” and he has defiantly stated that:

As long as we remain liberation fighters, so long will we refuse to be told by others, including these historic opponents and others, what we should think or do” (Mail & Guardian 15 Oct 2003:2).

This shows an unfortunate mindset in the new government that has not yet made the transition from fighting for liberation, to leading a fledgling democracy through its first baby steps. Moreover, he lacks Mandela’s charm and conciliatory spirit - often causing division in the “rainbow country” through divisive remarks like the one made at the Human Rights Commission Conference in 2000–

racism organised our society in such a manner that the black oppressed could not possibly have a way of distinguishing between those who elected to enforce a racist system, and those who were the involuntary beneficiaries of racism...you may not have been against us, which we only know from what you say, but you were not with us...” (Mail & Guardian 1 Sep 2000:1).

Unfortunately, although the majority of South Africans have experienced improvements in their daily existence in the last decade of democracy, there has also been a rising new class of elites, many of whom finance their ostentatious lifestyles through corruption (Mail & Guardian 25 April 2003:3). Interviews with ordinary citizens reveal disappointment and disillusionment –a woman confined to a wheelchair after being shot during the uprisings in Soweto which started on June 16, 1976, said:

some people say there has been a change in South Africa, but I can’t see it...the schools in Soweto still have no facilities. If the government was really interested in us they would sit down and talk to us and listen to our needs

She also expressed disapproved of the government’s “day of celebration” announced in honour of the uprisings, saying that:

since 1994 this noble day has lost its meaning. Instead of being commemorated in a dignified way...the present government is undermining and insulting our painful history. For us June 16 will always be a solemn day, the day we changed the face of the revolution, a day of courage” (Mail & Guardian 10 Oct 2003:2).

In other areas, people have complained about a perceived favouring of ANC supporters in distributing the benefits of freedom–

When we signed the peace treaty with the ANC, it was not because we were scared of them. We don’t mind a return to war if necessary” said one IFP supporter (Mail & Guardian 16 Jan 2004:1). 

How well-founded these accusations are, or how viable such a war would be, is not certain, but these widely-held beliefs certainly undermine efforts at peace building in the country. The African population remains divided, and Mbeki’s “African Renaissance” is out of reach of the majority of his government’s supporters - revealing that it has lost touch with its grassroots beginnings.

3.2.2 Women as Contributors to Peace building - not merely passive victims
This is not just a question of equity or fairness. We know that bringing women to the peace table improves the quality of agreements reached and increases the chance of success in implementing, just as involving women in post-conflict governance reduces the likelihood of returning to war. Reconstruction works best when it involves women as planners, implementers, and beneficiaries. The single most productive investment in revitalising agriculture, restoring health systems, reducing Infant mortality, and improving other social indicators after conflict is in women’s and girl’s education. Further, insisting on full accountability for actions against women during conflict is essential for the re-establishment of rule of law” (Steinberg 2003:1).

While it is important not to generalise or idealise the role of women too much, the neglect of women’s perspectives in development and peace building can account for many of the gaps that exist between policy ideals and their implementation. South Africa needs to be reunited as a people, with a common vision - and women have a wealth of unique giftings to contribute towards this dimension of society. Women care. Women listen. Women bond. Women nurture. Women do. Women forgive (more readily). Women have had to learn to persevere and patiently endure. Women fight to protect the weak, and include the unpopular.

At the World Summit for Sustainable Development, held in Johannesburg in 2002, programs for clean water, sanitation, hygiene, small-scale agriculture, housing and a $15 billion program to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean were announced - all of which directly impact women, and their children (Steinberg 2003:3).

In some parts of South Africa, children left at home while their parents are at work are “eating sand and water to make their bellies feel full enough to let them sleep” (Douglas 2003:1). The first National Census revealed that 30 per cent (12 million people) lacked access to safe water and more than 60 per cent had no electricity (Adelson 2000:3). More recent figures have revealed that:

close to a third of South Africa’s estimated 13,4-million children work, mostly on farms and in family businesses...an estimated 19 000 children, excluding street children, beg in public for at least 3 hours a week...about 432 000 children aged between 5 and 17...said they performed unpaid household chores for 14 hours or more a week” (Mail & Guardian 31 May 2002:1).

Women of Vision is also helping women in South Africa fight Domestic Violence (Steinberg 2003:4) - a huge problem in South Africa, as male aggression was turned on vulnerable women in the home when no satisfactory outlet could be found for their frustrations in an oppressive environment under apartheid. 

During the uprisings of the 1980s, violence was commonplace, but one incident serves to illustrate the brutality that was directed specifically towards women - when a group of youths ‘necklaced’ a suspected police informant, they not only placed the tyre filled with petrol around her, and ignited it, but also beat her, stoned her, then stripped her and shoved a broken bottle into her vagina (Welsh 2000:488). If only such stories were the exception, rather than an indicator of something seriously wrong in the very fabric of a society! 

Similarly, recent work in South African prisons by Quaker groups has resulted in “a growing recognition that the violence encountered in prisons often begins in a domestic setting” (Madhvani 2003:1). Quaker groups have also helped form weekly support groups for women who have been abused or raped, or whose children have been raped (Douglas 2003:2). This is a growing problem in South Africa

“[the] rape capital of the world, where children and even babies are most often the victims. A combination of factors, no doubt, are at work: disempowered men, disillusioned and jobless in the post-Apartheid era...An attitude to women that classes them as a commodity to be sold in exchange for cattle...A culture of violence, where human life has little value...the myth about sex with a virgin being a cure for AIDS...” (Douglas 2004:1).

Women need to rise up, as their silence is robbing the nation of a substantial portion of its voice and conscience. A world dominated exclusively by men is like a room full of unruly football-players - the very entrance of a woman encourages restraint and a return to decent behaviour. The gentle voice of a mother has guided most men towards maturity and respect for others, and many a wife has counselled her husband in the art of sensitivity and compromise. 

Peace is a practical lifestyle, as much as it is an ideal, so a “culture of peace” can be encouraged through everything “from child-rearing to economic structures” - and in a country like South Africa, this is especially important in counteracting the violence which for years has had a particularly negative impact on women and children (Adelson 2000:8). Women have a unique and essential contribution to make towards a lasting peace that suffuses every aspect of everyday living. Unfortunately not many virtuous role models have existed in South Africa in the past - with the infamous Winnie Madikizela-Mandela proclaiming in 1986 that:

together, hand-in-hand with our sticks and matches, with our necklaces [a gruesome way of burning someone to death with a tyre around them], we shall liberate this country” (Mail & Guardian 23 Dec 1999:5).

More recently, however, inspirational stories are surfacing - like the group of women in Kalk Bay, who recently invested in a fishing licence and boat together, and are planning to donate all the money made to the local school and to buy a van to transport the pensioners to and from the local hospital (Mail & Guardian 3 May 2002:3). There have been calls from around the globe, to form alliances between women of different backgrounds, to combat not only male domination, but aggressive and destructive behaviour in all its manifestations - as such alliances are more valuable than development projects handed down from ‘experts’ (Simmons 2003:253). However, many still view the advancement of Women’s interests as:

the ‘soft side’ of foreign policy...[but] there is nothing ‘soft’ about...holding...human rights violators accountable for their actions against women, forcing demobilised soldiers to refrain from domestic violence, or insisting that women have a seat at the table in peace negotiations and post-conflict governments” (Steinberg 2003:4).

3.2.3 Deeper: Analysis and Understanding
Brown attributes the potential success or failure of peace building to three core concerns - good governance, economic growth and stability, and a dynamic civil society or community (Brown in Miall et al.1999:91). Yet,

“the actualities of African state and non-state foreign policy/ international relations/ political economy are in great flux as both global and local contexts continue to evolve...neither analyses nor policies towards them have really kept pace with the actual shifts in the relationships among states, companies and civil societies...such trilateral relations can lead backwards towards authoritarian or anarchic regimes as well as forwards towards peace-keeping/-building, let alone human security or development” (Shaw 2003:14).

Radical Africanists like Claude Ake have also challenged “the very idea that liberal democracy is democracy at all” - as its strong link to capitalism makes it “an elitist, rather than a mass-democratic, order” (Mail & Guardian 9 Jan 2004:1). Furthermore, historians have commented on the inaccuracy and oversimplification of viewing the black people of South Africa “as passive recipients of oppression, rather than as active agents in conflict” (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:2).

Achille Mbembe, an African writer, argues that both Marxism and Nationalism in Africa have failed as they are “faked philosophies” and are premised on the belief that “the African cannot express himself or herself other than as a wounded and traumatised subject” (Mail & Guardian 29 April 2004:2).

Another African writer, Njabulo Ndebele, brings a reminder that from the female point of view–

we could not always blame the oppressor. When oppressed black men abuse their women and children, there is a limit to which they can blame oppression for their cruelty. Even the oppressed have to learn to accept responsibility for their actions. That is where their freedom begins” (Mail & Guardian 29 April 2004:5).

Grief and trauma counselling was offered as part of the National reconciliation and healing process. However, many critics felt that “the TRC’s emphasis on forgiveness and restorative justice was at odds with more popular ethics of retribution and punishment” (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:2). Some people still seem to feel that the healing process, and final closure, require that justice be executed first - and that “we’ve buried too much of our sense of rectitude” (Mail & Guardian 15 Mar 2003:2). 

Despite the majority of black people, as well as a narrow majority of white people surveyed in 1996, expressing support for the TRC, and hope for a peaceful future as a result of this process (Mail & Guardian 21 March 2003:2), views expressed in the media have often been critical and even mocking. One of Africa’s renowned scholars, Ali Mazrui refers scornfully to “Africa’s short memory of hate” (Hoppers 2000:6) - although most would agree that this, at least, is a reason to hope for peaceful co-existence in the future of South Africa.

The new South Africa has chosen a pluralist and open model for the future - “with the impetus of a new paradigm transcending borders, to become an African perspective, differing from the dominant Western view in its emphasis on community and relationship” (Adelson 2000:5).

As we approach the end of the first decade of democracy, we may have to accept that South Africa is no exception to the rule that human development has never proceeded in a straight line, that we will never all agree with each other...Wherever we stand, we must think beyond our comfortable intellectual worlds, without fear of engaging with different positions and without labelling those who hold them" (Mail & Guardian 25 April 2003:3).

3.2.4 Longer: Planning and Vision
The government has recruited experienced people from NGOs, unions and universities, resulting in:

a remarkable ability to generate visionary policy pertaining to virtually every dimension of its operations, but technical ability to implement programs lags far behind...” (Adelson 2000:9). 

It has also been noted that South Africans have developed “a culture of negotiation” - expertise in negotiation at all levels, which will definitely prove useful in the future (Adelson 2000:10). “The traditional African view of time is much more extended than the Western, with ancestors considered present, and elders’ views respected” (Adelson 2000:4). As Galtung pointed out, holistic approaches, which result in small advances on multiple levels, are still preferable to making a giant leap in just one direction - which could result in gross imbalances (Adelson 2000:1).

As a visual representation of this understanding, Adelson uses the three-dimensional cross of mythical Christianity - comparing its lateral dimension to space-time, “which includes nature, society, and sensed reality” (Adelson 2000:2). As with most complex situations, one is only able to understand reality in South Africa in relation to time -the longitudinal axis refers to contemplation of both past events and future ideals in “shaping present acts” (Adelson 2000:2). Finally, the vertical axis “concerns morality, ...and critical awareness of a situation. ‘Consciousness-raising’, particularly important in the new South Africa, aptly suggests the vertical” (Adelson 2000:2). 

The present moment is where all three axes intersect, producing interesting opportunities for reflection and creative thinking - as Allister Sparks declares - “tomorrow is another country” (Adelson 2000:2).

3.2.5 Higher: Consciousness and Spiritual Awakening
Since eighty per cent of South Africans are Christians (Welsh 2000:524), spiritual beliefs play an important role in peace building and hope for the future. Key actors in the reconstruction of the Nation - from Tutu and Mandela to the many church-based NGOs, finding inspiration and strength in their faith–

far from being helpless victims of terror...had an integrity and sense of commitment which brought out the best of humanity within them” (Adelson 2000:5).

Affirming their Christian roots, the anthem of liberation used during the long years of struggle, is a Christian hymn (‘Nkosi Sikelel’i Afrika’ - God Bless Africa), and has now become the National anthem. Mandela’s own decision to emerge from the long years of imprisonment with no bitterness, but instead to learn how to let “careful thought rule over strong emotions” is a remarkable inspiration for all - “making peace became my priority. It is the object of my energy” (Rees 2003:112).

Mandela called the work of the TRC “not reconciliation, but rather the basis for it” (Adelson 2000:1). Forgiveness should be viewed as:

a start towards reconciliation, as an agreement between parties to put their feet on the same road in the future, to begin to treat each other as neighbours again, but all under that caution that some evils take a long time to recover from” (Shriver & Lean 2001:2).

Kriesberg sees peace building as a journey taken from the starting point of Truth and Justice, followed by Forgiveness and Healing, and arriving at Peace, Security and Wellbeing (Kriesberg in Miall et al.1999:209). 

The 1993 constitution of the Coalition Government of National Unity spoke of “a bridge between a troubled past and a hopeful future” (Adelson 2000:1). Albie Sachs described the TRC’s role as “putting everyone on the same map” (Adelson 2000:2). Forgiveness is just the beginning of spiritual growth, and the pursuit of higher ideals than merely protecting human rights because of legal and constitutional obligations. The TRC’s final report called for a series of what it called “Moral Summits”, to deliberate on:

 “moral failure and how to regain moral strength...to aid long- term, sustainable transformation, as South Africans carry out what Mandela calls ‘reconstruction and development of the soul’” (Adelson 2000:5).

3.2.6 Wider: Solidarity and Pluralism
A new basis for National Identity, Solidarity and Unity needs to be found - contrary to the separation of Apartheid, which was the unnatural imposition of a system which bound “white and black together in a web of mutual destructiveness” (Adelson 2000:2). In the past, “peace” merely meant the absence of direct violence, which was an artificial situation enforced by the Ministry of “Law and Order”, and maintaining the status quo (Adelson 2000:1) or institutionalised violence. “Development” was governed by race too - “capitalism and apartheid combined to produce extraordinary inequality unmatched virtually anywhere else” (Adelson 2000:3).

The “separateness”, division and isolationism of the old order must be replaced by a celebration of pluralism, shared interests and mutually working towards peace and human development, as uniquely defined and designed by South Africans of all backgrounds. People-centred development must, by very definition, “produce sustainable and justly distributed improvements in their quality of life consistent with their own aspirations” (Korten 1990:67).

It is important to remember, though, that South Africa needs external input and partnership to achieve these lofty goals–

just as ‘it takes a village to raise a child’, it takes a world to create a culture of peace and human-centred development for South Africa” (Adelson 2000:11).

The annual donor consultations already held with the government are only scratching the surface in terms of their potential as fora for mutual learning and creative problem-solving. Important changes, like the RDP Fund Act, which streamlined government procedures for the flow of foreign aid, were encouraged through these talks (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:283), and the co-ordination and tracking of programme funds and discussion of issues (Bratton & Landsberg 1999:281). This is essential - to ensure efficient delivery of stated programme outcomes. However, their full potential is yet to be seized - to produce holistic, practicable and organic alternatives to pre-packaged first world solutions.

Conclusion

Search in your past for what is good and beautiful. Build your future from there” -Paul Kruger, 1902 (Mail & Guardian 23 Dec 1999:1).

We change the past when we commit ourselves to preserving the good in the past and refusing to repeat its evil” (Shriver & Lean 2001:2).

South Africa’s past has been re-examined through the TRC, and even the RDP, with all its unrealistic expectations, is now in the past. The present includes the GEAR programme for socio-economic development, and many grassroots initiatives organised by the government, NGOs and international partnerships. The future the visionaries in South Africa are aiming for is a “Rainbow Nation” - Mandela, in his inaugural speech in 1994, declared that: 

We enter into a covenant that we shall build a society in which all South Africans, both black and white, will be able to walk tall, without any fear in their hearts, assured of their inalienable right to human dignity - a rainbow nation at peace with itself and the world” (Mail & Guardian 23 Dec 1999:6).

Until every person is assured a voice and a place in the country’s future, and every race and culture is respected and valued for its contribution to this ‘rainbow nation’, South Africa will not fully realise its potential as a Nation. A “culture of inclusion” needs to be nurtured (Snow 2003:359) - a safe communal place where humans can express their unique giftedness, creating meaningful encounters with other humans and sharing their individual perspectives - to create a rich tapestry of colour and texture that embraces difference and pluralism. South Africa has attained liberty and equality, but fraternity will be more difficult, as it has to grow naturally – no policies or programmes can be superimposed upon the population to force them to adopt a spirit of “ubuntu”.

South Africa, like most nations undergoing political, economic, social and spiritual transformation, needs to hold onto a vision that is deeper, longer, higher and wider than the current neoliberal policies alone can provide. Deeper understanding and analysis – to rebuild fractured communal identities; longer timelines – to encourage vision and participation; higher levels of consciousness and spirituality – to enable forgiveness; and wider solidarity - to ensure pluralism and inclusion.




References

Adelson, A., 1999-2000, Development and Peace in South Africa, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/cida_ind.nsf, accessed 16/5/04.

Baker, P.H., 1989, ‘The Reagan Years’, in Getting it Right: U.S. Policy in South Africa Ford Foundation and Foreign Policy Assoc., New York on http://www.usip.org/pubs/catalog/exerpts/hrights_ch3.pdf, accessed 16/5/04.

Baker, P.H., 9/8/2001, Special Report: U.S. Human Rights Policy toward Africa http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr73.pdf , accessed 16/5/04.

Bratton, M. & Landsberg, C., 1999 ‘South Africa’ in Forman, S. & Patrick, S., Good Intentions: Pledges of Aid for Postconflict Recovery, Lynne RiennerColorado, pp259-280.

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration (CCMA), 1994, Labour Relations Act: the Code of Good Practice, CCMA Information Services, MarshalltownSouth Africa.

Douglas, H., 5/12/2003, QPSW Journal Letter from South Africa, http://www.quaker.org.uk/peace/jlet/saam5.pdf, accessed 16/5/04.

Douglas, H., 6/3/2004, QPSW Journal Letter from South Africa, http://www.quaker.org.uk/peace/jlet/saam5.pdf, accessed 16/5/04.

Eloff, T., 1998, South African Business and the Transition to Peace and Democracy: From Honest Broker to Constructive Partner, http://www.xs4all.nl/-conflic1/pbp/9/4_safric.htm, accessed 16/5/04.

Hoppers, C.A.O, 5/5/2000, Higher Education for Peace: Conference in Tromso Norway 4-6 May 2000, http://www.peace2.uit.no/hefp/contributions/papers/Hoppers_Odora_03D. pdf, accessed 16/5/04.

Korten, D., 1990, Getting to the 21st Century: Voluntary Action and the Global Agenda, Kumarian PressConnecticutU.S.A.

Lederach, J.P., 1998, ‘Remember and Change’ in Herr, R. & Zimmerman Herr, J. (Eds), Transforming Violence: Linking Local and Global Peacemaking, Herald Press, Penn, pp.177-189.

Lutheranworld, 23/10/2002, Inter-Faith Peace Summit: Rediscovering Indigenous Conflict-Resolution Practices, http://www.lutheranworld.org/News/LWI/EN/1088.EN.html, accessed 16/5/04.

Madhvani, A., 5/11/2003, QPSW Journal Letter from South Africa, http://www.quaker.org.uk/peace/jlet/saam5.pdf , accessed 16/5/04.

Madhvani, A., 6/3/2004, QPSW Journal Letter from South Africa, http://www.quaker.org.uk/peace/jlet/saam5.pdf accessed 16/5/04.

Mail & Guardian, http://archive.mg.co.za/MGArchive, accessed 16/5/04.

Miall, H., Ramsbotham, O. & Woodhouse, T., 1999, Contemporary Conflict Resolution, Polity Press, Cambridge, pp.1-94,185-225.

Office of the President of South Africa, 1994, RDP White Paper: Discussion Document, CTP Book Publishers, Cape Town, S.A.

Rees, S., 2003, Passion for Peace: Exercising Power Creatively, University of New South Wales Press, SydneyAustralia.

Shaw, T., Feb 2003, Conflict and Peace-building in Africa: The Regional Dimensions, http://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/dps/dps2003/dp2003-10.pdf, accessed 16/5/04.

Shriver, D. &Lean, M., Oct-Nov 2001, Peace-building and forgiveness: the first of two Agenda for Reconciliation conference focussed on peace-building initiatives, http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KZH/is_5_14/ai_30124031, accessed 16/5/04.

Simmons, P., 2003 ‘Women in Development: A Threat to Liberation’ in Rahnema, M. & Bawtree, V., 2003, The Post-Development Reader, Zed Books Ltd., London, pp.244-253.

Snow, J.A., 2003, ‘Birth of the Inclusion Society’ in Rahnema, M. & Bawtree, V., 2003, The Post-Development Reader, Zed Books Ltd., London, pp.359-362.

South African Bureau for Information, 1987, This is South Africa, CTP Book Printers, Cape Town, S.A.

South African Department of Justice, 1995, Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, http://www.doj.gov.za/trc/legal/act9534.htm, accessed 16/5/04.

South African Department of Justice, 1995, A Summary of Reparation and Rehabilitation Policy, including proposals to be considered by the President, http://www.doj.gov.za/trc/reparations/summary.htm, accessed 16/5/04.

Steinberg, D.K, 6/3/2003, The Role of Women in Peacebuilding and Reconstruction: More than Victims, http://www.state.gov/s/p/rem/2003/18759.htm, accessed 16/5/04.

Tutu, D., Foreword in Rees, S., 2003, Passion for Peace: Exercising Power Creatively, University of New South Wales Press, SydneyAustralia.

Welsh, F., 2000, A History of South Africa, Harper Collins Publishers, London.

Williams, S. ‘The Usefulness of Humour’ in Reychler, L. & Paffenholz, T., 2001, Peace-Building: A Field guide, Lynne Rienner Publishers, ColoradoU.S.A., pp.492-495.

Woods, D., 2000, Rainbow Nation Revisited: South Africa’s Decade of Democracy, Carlton Publishing Group, London.

Worden, N., 2000, The Making of Modern South Africa, 3rd ed. Blackwell Publishers, OxfordU.K.