PAUL T. SHIPALE (with inputs by Folito Nghitongovali Diawara Gaspar)
There are realities whose poignancy transcends mere numerical quantification. Namibia’s recent downgrade by the World Bank’s classification – a global singularity, being the only state to transition from upper – middle – income to lower – middle – income status in 2025 does not constitute a mere statistical datum. It represents, rather, the visceral cry of an economic paradigm in the process of disintegration, an echo vehemently amplified by intellectual contributions in this prestigious journal.
This imperative cry demands an introspection that transcends the coldness of econometric language, delving into the depths of structural causes and existential implications for the Namibian nation and, by extension, for the pan – Africanist project of self – determination.
President Hage Geingob, in his address at the second Qatar Economic Forum on June 23, 2022, reiterated a crucial call for Namibia’s reclassification by the World Bank. He argued that the classification as an upper – middle – income country was profoundly insensitive to the profound distortions created by the unequal distribution of resources within the nation. This sentiment resonated deeply with the core assertion that Namibia’s economic woes are not merely statistical anomalies but symptoms of a chronic pathology rooted in power structures and political choices.
The President’s emphasis on the triple challenges of poverty, inequality, and unemployment, which he asserted cannot be effectively addressed under inaccurate classifications, underscored the urgency of a re-evaluation that goes beyond superficial metrics. The classification, he noted, has severe implications for Namibia’s access to affordable debt financing and grants, highlighting a critical nexus between international classifications and national development aspirations.
This arbitrary categorization, which simply divides the Gross National Income (GNI) by a small population to arrive at a high per capita income, fails to capture the multidimensional factors essential for assessing socio – economic well-being, such as social mobility, gender equality, and access to basic services that sustain lives, as well as access to technology. This approach resonates with the late Thandika Mkandawire’s critique of “institutional monocropping,” where idealized, one – size – fits – all models, often Anglo – American in origin, are imposed on developing countries without due consideration for their unique historical, cultural, and socio – economic contexts. Mkandawire argued that such classifications and the policies derived from them often lead to “institutional monotasking,” reducing the role of institutions to narrow objectives like stimulating investment, thereby sidestepping crucial issues of social equity and genuine development.
The confluence of these perspectives – the academic critique of a disintegrating economic paradigm and the presidential plea for a more nuanced classification forms the bedrock of our analysis into Namibia’s shattered mirror. The reflection it casts is not just of economic decline, but of a profound challenge to sovereignty and the pan – Africanist ideal.
The Fallacy of Minimisation: A Dangerous Sedative
When confronted with the assertion that Namibia’s downgrade “is not a death sentence,” we are compelled to a state of apprehension bordering on indignation. Such a phrase, seemingly comforting and uttered with the lightness of an analgesic, reveals itself to be an insidious sedative that postpones the radical surgical intervention that the Namibian nation urgently needs. The rhetoric of minimization, instead of confronting reality with the seriousness it demands, seeks to dilute the gravity of a diagnosis that, if not treated with due urgency, can lead to economic and social metastasis. This perspective is further amplified by President Geingob’s own observations regarding the challenges faced by Namibia.
He explicitly stated that the triple challenges of poverty, inequality, and unemployment cannot be effectively addressed if these inaccurate classifications, which lead to minimization of the problem, are left unchallenged.
The macroeconomic indicators – the 12.9% regression in GNI per capita, the persistent stagnation of the mining sector, and a growth that languishes, suffocated by inertia and the absence of strategic vision – cannot be attributed to contingency, bad luck, or ineluctable economic cycles. They are, rather, the unequivocal symptoms of a chronic pathology, deeply rooted in power structures and political choices: the perpetuation of a neocolonial dependence on the export of primary resources and the import of social vulnerability. As lucidly articulated here, persistence in this trajectory amounts to tacit complicity with “economic colonialism,” a self – immolation consented to on the altar of exogenous interests that contribute little or nothing to the emancipation and prosperity of the Namibian people. History, an implacable teacher, has already shown us that passivity in the face of such symptoms is the prelude to a collapse that transcends mere statistics, reaching the core of a nation’s dignity and sovereignty.
The Golden Trap of International Aid: A Desk Neocolonialism
What, then, is the imminent danger lurking behind apparent benevolence? The temptation, insidious in its allure, to interpret this status downgrade as a mere safe conduct for obtaining “soft” loans and external assistance a financial balm that, at first glance, promises ephemeral relief. However, at this crucial juncture, we are compelled to light a warning beacon, a searing light that dispels the mists of illusion: Official Development Assistance (ODA) devoid of genuine sovereignty constitutes an insidious manifestation of desk neocolonialism. It is not, let us be unequivocally clear, genuine aid, but rather a new guise for old practices of domination.
President Geingob’s concern about the upper-middle income classification’s implications for Namibia’s access to affordable debt financing and grants, while valid from a pragmatic standpoint, inadvertently highlights the very trap that Namibia must, with utmost vigilance, avoid. The reliance on such external mechanisms, without a clear and unyielding strategy for self-reliance and economic liberation, risks deepening the nation’s dependency, thereby perpetuating the very cycle of subjugation we seek to break.
This aligns with Mkandawire’s broader critique that external aid, when tied to imposed institutional frameworks and narrow policy objectives, can inadvertently reinforce dependency rather than foster true development. He cautioned against the dangers of “institutional monotasking,” where development efforts are reduced to servicing a standard set of often – imposed policies, neglecting broader societal goals like social equity and nation – building. History, as discussed in “The US – Africa Summit…,” corroborates that assistance devoid of counterparts that foster local beneficiation, endogenous industrialization, and political autonomy, amounts to self – sabotage with golden instruments. It is the hand that offers bread, but which, simultaneously, ties the feet.
Accepting marginal concessions, crumbs from a banquet that does not belong to us, to the detriment of our economic self – determination, does not constitute rescue; it is, in essence, a silent capitulation, a renunciation of the ability to forge our own destiny. True aid is that which empowers, which liberates, which does not impose conditions that perpetuate dependence. Any other form is a golden shackle, a Trojan horse that, in the long run, will cost the soul of the nation. The focus must shift from merely securing external funds to building an internal capacity for self – sustained growth and development, a capacity that is not undermined by externally imposed “monocropping” of institutions or “monotasking” of development objectives.
The Imperative of Transition: Regionalism or Collapse
What, then, is the escape route from this existential crossroads? Our preceding analyses leave no room for ambiguity, nor for the debilitating complacency that has, for far too long, characterized public administration in Namibia. The nation must, with an unyielding imperative, establish itself as a regional pivot, a veritable economic fulcrum, or inexorably succumb to the “middle – income trap” a perilous economic limbo where development stagnates, and the legitimate aspirations of a young and vibrant population are condemned to fade into the ether of unfulfilled potential. Such a desideratum demands nothing less than a radical rupture with the prevailing status quo, a profound metamorphosis that transcends mere rhetorical flourishes and materializes, unequivocally, in concrete and irreversible actions. This implies:
The Eradication of “Business as Usual”
It is imperative to transcend the empty rhetoric of plans full of ethereal promises and unattainable goals, than catalysts for an economic and social revolution. Namibia can no longer afford to elaborate grandiose documents that, in practice, become mere bureaucratic exercises, devoid of real impact on the lives of citizens. Effective implementation, accountability, and adaptability are the pillars of a new approach.
President Geingob’s acknowledgement of the need for a solutions – oriented mindset and the employment of multiple strategies to reduce inequality and poverty, including sustainable investments and comprehensive social safety nets, aligns with this call for concrete action. However, the historical skepticism regarding policy implementation in Namibia, where constitutional provisions and national acts have often not been effectively put into practice, necessitates a critical examination of how these strategies will translate into tangible results.
The Business Rescue Task Force (BRTF) report, which indicated that while some gains have been made in fighting income inequality, much work remains, further underscores the gap between stated intentions and actual outcomes. This persistent gap between policy formulation and effective implementation can be seen as a consequence of the very “institutional monocropping” that Mkandawire warned against, where externally imposed models of governance and development planning fail to account for the specific local context and capabilities, leading to a disconnect between policy and practice.
Diplomacy Intertwined with Industrial Sweat
The strategic integration of ports, railway infrastructures, and energy networks with neighboring SADC nations is not a mere good – neighbor initiative; it is a sine qua non condition for Namibia’s survival and prosperity. Regional interconnection, trade facilitation, and the creation of cross – border value chains are the antidotes to economic vulnerability and external dependence. Diplomacy must serve the economic and industrial interests of the nation, paving the way for industrialization and the beneficiation of natural resources on African soil.
This aligns with President Geingob’s broader vision of promoting Namibia as an attractive investment destination, but with the crucial caveat that such investments must be strategically aligned with regional integration and the development of local value chains, rather than merely facilitating the export of raw materials. This approach directly counters the “monotasking” tendency to prioritize raw material export for short – term gains, instead advocating for a more holistic and regionally integrated industrial development that benefits the entire continent.
An Inducing State, Not a Mere Observer
The active promotion of agribusiness, renewable energies, and technological innovation is not a discretionary option, a luxury that can be postponed; it is an existential mandate. The Namibian state must cease to be a mere passive regulator and assume its role as an inducer of development, investing in infrastructure, capacity building, research and development, and creating an environment conducive to the flourishing of local entrepreneurship. Economic diversification, value addition, and the creation of decent jobs are the pillars of a resilient and sovereign economy, capable of resisting external shocks and serving the interests of its own people.
The stark reality of Namibia ranking second globally in wealth inequality, with a Gini coefficient of 59.1% since 2015, underscores the urgent need for a state that actively intervenes to correct these historical imbalances and ensure a more equitable distribution of wealth. This active role of the state is precisely what Mkandawire advocated for, arguing against the imposed limitations on state capacity that often accompany “institutional monocropping” and instead emphasizing the transformative potential of a state committed to genuine development and social justice.
The Epistemological Relevance of These Articles
We do not, it must be emphatically stated, limit ourselves to a mere journalistic exercise; rather, we undertake a meticulous autopsy of the present with the singular, overarching aim of resurrecting the future. Our articles are not mere chronicles of events, devoid of deeper meaning or critical insight, but rather profound epistemological interventions that boldly challenge dominant narratives and propose a new, more incisive interpretive framework for the complex Namibian reality.
A Hammer that Shatters the Illusion of Conformity
In a society often anesthetized by the pervasive complacency and passive acceptance of the status quo, our articles function as a potent catalyst, forcing an uncomfortable, yet ultimately necessary, confrontation with uncomfortable truths and unmasking the insidious fallacy that the current trajectory is either the only possible path or, indeed, the most desirable. They represent a decisive break with the official narrative, meticulously exposing the fissures and inherent contradictions of an economic model that, in its current manifestation, serves the narrow interests of a privileged few at the profound expense of the many. The President’s reiteration of the call for reclassification, and his astute critique of the flawed methodology, can be seen as an official acknowledgment of the urgent need to shatter the illusion of conformity imposed by external classifications. This aligns with Mkandawire’s call to resist the intellectual hegemony of externally imposed development paradigms and to instead cultivate context-specific solutions.
A Megaphone that Amplifies the Murmurs Already Present in the Streets
We endeavor to translate the pervasive discontent, the simmering frustration, and the legitimate aspirations of the populace into an articulated and incisive language, thereby giving concrete form and substantive essence to the yearning for a more just and truly sovereign Namibia. The BRTF report’s finding that the growth of previously disadvantaged Namibians is still at a vulnerable and fledgling stage, and that the country remains one of the most skewed economies in the world with respect to unequal distribution of wealth, are precisely the murmurs from the streets that these articles amplify.
A Map for Emancipation, Not an Epitaph
Far from being a mournful lament over Namibia’s perceived decline, our articles serve as an indispensable guide, a meticulously charted roadmap for economic and political liberation. We do not merely diagnose the pervasive disease but, with equal rigor, prescribe the efficacious remedy, meticulously pointing out viable paths and strategic imperatives for the nation to reclaim its rightful destiny and assiduously construct a future characterized by prosperity and genuine self – determination.
The World Bank’s reclassification is, indeed, a shattered mirror. We can, perhaps, lacerate ourselves with the fragments, lamenting the lost image, or, as we propose, to use each shard to reflect a new identity: that of a Namibia that has transmuted the mere export of minerals into the profound export of sovereignty, a nation that, instead of being a mere supplier of raw materials, resolutely becomes a beacon of development and emancipation for the entire African continent.
Statistics, in their apparent neutrality, are not an innocuous construct. They are forged from unearned wages, from youth deprived of hope, and from postponed aspirations. Ignoring this warning transcends mere technical error: it constitutes a profound betrayal of our coming generation. The “now or never” is not a mere figure of speech; it is the ultimate warning before the imminence of darkness, an ultimatum that demands immediate and decisive action.
The Call to Action: Reclaiming Namibia’s Destiny
Namibia’s recent downgrade by the World Bank, far from being a final verdict or an irrevocable sentence of condemnation, must be recognized as a kairos, an opportune and profoundly decisive moment for the nation. It is, therefore, not merely an invitation, but rather an imperative demand, to abandon the debilitating complacency that has, for far too long, served as the greatest impediment to genuine progress, and to courageously embrace a bold and transformative vision of self – determination. The facile rhetoric of “it is not a death sentence” must be transmuted, through an act of collective will, into a resonant battle cry, a resounding shout of hope and unyielding resilience: “It is not a death sentence, but a call to resurrection!”
Our warnings, it must be underscored, are not mere academic observations, devoid of passion or the gravitas of urgency; they are, rather, prophecies that are unfolding before our very eyes, resonant echoes of an ancestral wisdom that unequivocally warns against the perils of inaction and the debilitating consequences of political myopia. Namibia now more than ever requires a leadership that profoundly understands that true sovereignty is not measured merely by the ceremonial hoisting of a flag in protocol ceremonies, but by the tangible ability to nourish its populace, to educate its progeny, and to meticulously construct an economy that genuinely serves the interests of its own citizens, rather than succumbing to external and predatory interests.
The time to “reclaim our place” in the concert of nations, not as a mere subservient appendix of global capital, but as a sovereign and autonomous actor, is unequivocally now. And the arduous, yet ultimately redemptive, path to this liberation is paved with the unwavering courage to decisively break with the entrenched status quo, to ardently embrace a transformative regionalism that intrinsically strengthens pan – Africanist ties, and to forge a developmental state that is truly pan – Africanist in its very essence, unyieldingly committed to the sacred principles of social justice, economic equity, and human dignity.
The future of Namibia, let it be unequivocally stated, is not preordained, neither is it inscribed in the celestial constellations, nor in the cold, dispassionate projections of international rating agencies. Rather, it is meticulously forged in the crucible of the actions that will be undertaken today, in the profound choices that will, with an undeniable certainty, delineate the stark difference between an ignominious stagnation and a vibrant, self – determined prosperity.
May history, that impartial chronicler of human endeavor, record that, when confronted by the shattered mirror reflecting the fragilities of the present, Namibia, with an indomitable spirit, chose the arduous path of reconstruction, the unwavering resolve of resilience, and the ultimate triumph of self – determination, rather than succumbing to a passive resignation in the face of an externally imposed destiny.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of our employers and this newspaper but solely our personal views as citizens and Pan-Africanists.
