Yours Truly Ideologically cannot but be perplexed that those from the affected communities who must be in the better know and how, are the ones today in the forefront of delivering their communities on the altar of the second genocide.

Because if the agreement between the Namibian government, and its German counterpart, needs to be seen as and/or called anything, then it is no more better than a second genocide against the very communities of the Ovaherero, Ovambanderu and Nama, that the agreement purported to reconcile and reconstruct. With the midwives of the purported reconciliation and reconstruction, sadly, none other than members of these very communities. Communities that for 117 years now, have been wailing and yearning for real redemption and relieve from the trauma they have been carrying for as long as they have been alive. With some long gone without any solace in this regard. But not the kind now on the table. Which is in the mood and mode of now an archaic cliché of Seek ye the Political Kingdom First. This was the dictum of many an African liberation struggles and/or decolonisation processes, an illusion of political emancipation paving the way for a latter day economic emancipation in the least, if not economic revolution and socialism ultimately. This illusion has been proven what it was and has been, just an illusion. Because none of the former colonised African countries, let alone any other colonised region globally, has truly realised economic emancipation.

Namibia herself has been 31 years politically independent, but her reality today is a neo-Colonial Capitalist mode of production with no prospects whatsoever, now and in the foreseeable future, nor in my lifetime or that of my contemporaries or that of our children. We simply find ourselves in the current untenable situation simply because as a country we compromised ourselves by accepting the Western Settlement Plan, which became the United Nations Resolution 435. As if this is not good enough a lesson, in the case of our demand for reparations, we are being told by those in the better know and how, to first accept what is on the table, yesteryears political kingdom, and Germany would as time goes, provide for the rest. This is despite both governments being categorical in the Joint Declaration. “Both Governments share the understanding that these amounts mentioned above settle all financial aspects of the issues relating to the past addressed in this Joint Declaration.”

As much as this provision may not speak to the essence of the negotiations that have been ongoing between the two countries, which is Genocide, reference to Genocide is ominously missing in the Declaration, with a cameo appearance on two instances in the whole Declaration. There’s no mistaking that as far as the government of the Federal Republic of Germany is concerned, this Declaration, once signed, closes the Genocide chapter between the Namibian and German governments. It is important to note this closure as only being between the Namibian and its German counterparts. Because the finer print of this Declaration was, is and has never been intended for the two parties who essentially have a locus standi in this matter, the affected communities and the German government. But rather of bilateral significance as the officials of the two governments succinctly admit, and the Declaration itself pointedly states. “United in Remembrance of our Colonial Past, United in our Will to Reconcile, United in our Vision of the Future,” reads what can be seen as the preamble to the Declaration. These are the two governments speaking to each other. But not the affected communities and the German government speaking to each other. Because for that matter the issue has never been between the German communities and the affected communities in Namibia for them to be needing to reconcile.

A simple deduction, with the negotiations stillborn from inception, it is really frivolous to speak at this juncture on whether the amount is adequate or not. If the objective of the Namibian liberation struggle was to keep intact, if not entrench Capitalism, hence the prevalence and entrenchment of neo-Colonial Capitalism to day in the country, is it or would it be justifiable to criticise Namibian independence for not achieving, what? Because the objective was political independence, and this Namibia has achieved, unless one is saying the indigenous political elite is not politically in charge. Then that is a different discourse, which has nothing to do with the essence of, and for a revolution, which is ultimately about a radical socio-economic transformation, if not a complete overhaul of the current socio-economic system which is based on Capitalism.

Same can be said about the Genocide, Apology and Reparations, that it was, is and has never been intended for Germany to dictate, in the first place, whether it is guilty or not. Its brutal acts during the colonial period, especially against the Ovaherero, ovambanderu and Nama, speak for themselves. Therefore, Germany regarding Genocide against Namibia’s affected communities, is as guilty as charged. Secondly, Germany cannot be a judge in her own cause, as guilty as she is, to determine her own punishment. That was, is and could not have been the intentions of the founders of the reparation movement of the Ovaherero, Ovambanderu and Nama. One of these founders, Professor Mburumba Kerina is alive to testify to this. That the 2006 motion has indeed been cavalierly twisted, the cause blatantly compromised and a trust betrayed!