When the uprising started in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique’s northernmost province, in 2017, the insurgents used the only weapons they had: their machetes. And they cut off the heads of local elites whom they accused of being allied to the leaders of the ruling Mozambique Liberation Front (Frelimo) in stealing the mineral wealth. 

Forty years ago, there was another civil war in Mozambique, in which the Mozambique National Resistance (Renamo) committed atrocities such as burning people alive in buses.

But Renamo had been trained by the apartheid military, many of whom were believing members of the Dutch Reformed Church, which was firmly supporting apartheid. Yet no matter that the trainers thought they were doing the work of God to defend white rule and how cruel the Renamo atrocities were, those who perpetrated them were never called “Christian terrorists”. Yet we insist on calling the insurgents in Cabo Delgado “Islamist terrorists”.

Labels are important and shape how we look at civil wars. We try to label the opposition with the current global enemy. Renamo was said to be fighting “global communism” so as not to be accused of defending white rule. Now the Mozambican government is said to be fighting “global Islamists” and not protecting an elite that refuses to share the ruby, mineral and gas wealth with local people. Thus the labels shape how we see the war.

Save the Children Mozambique issued a press release on 16 March about children “murdered by armed men” – carefully not labelling the insurgents. But most media reports of the press release called them Islamist and stressed links to the Islamic State. All civil wars are cruel and brutal. Amnesty International accused the insurgents of war crimes and “heinous acts of violence” on 2 March. The organisation and others use the local name for the insurgents, al-Shabaab, which simply means the youth (and has no links to other al-Shabaabs). 

And Amnesty International also stressed that “al-Shabaab is primarily a homegrown armed group fighting over local issues, an insurgency sparked by the long-term underinvestment in the Muslim-majority province by the central government. The group uses jihadist ideology as an organising tool. While Islamist ideologies have been growing in Cabo Delgado for decades, the movement did not gain traction until the arrival of resource extraction industries that provide little subsequent benefit for the local communities.” Most local researchers support that position.

Grievance and outside intervention

Fifteen years ago I was the co-author of an Open University (United Kingdom) course and its textbook, Civil War, Civil Peace. One key point was that all civil wars have two things: a grievance serious enough that people feel they must kill to save their own lives, and outside intervention. In Cabo Delgado, the grievance is marginalisation and growing poverty and inequality as Frelimo oligarchs and the mining and gas companies do not share the wealth. 

Outside intervention to support al-Shabaab has included the Islamic State, which provided some publicity as well as support, including training in 2019 and 2020 but apparently not in the past six months. On the government side, outside support came first from a Russian private military company, the Wagner Group, and then its South African counterpart, the Dyck Advisory Group. 

United States “green berets” arrived on 15 March to train Mozambican marines. Portugal promises to send trainers, and the European Union and South Africa are also looking to provide support. On 10 March, the US formally labelled al-Shabaab, which it calls Islamic State of Iraq and Syria – Mozambique (Isis-Mozambique), as a foreign terrorist organisation.

All of the sudden support is not to assist Mozambique but to fight the new global enemy – Islam and the Islamic State. At the press conference on 11 March, John T Godfrey said that “we have to confront Isis in Africa”. His title is acting special envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat Isis, which means his job depends on fighting it, and Mozambique is just another place to send troops as part of that war.

But the other speaker at the US press conference, Michael Gonzales, said that “addressing the socioeconomic drivers of the threat, countering Isis messaging, and providing greater economic opportunity and resilience of the community so that the attraction to violent extremism is lessened” was essential in Cabo Delgado. His title is deputy assistant secretary in the US Bureau of African Affairs, which shows he has a different perspective.

Pushing a narrative 

The Frelimo leadership in Mozambique is pushing the foreign terrorism line very hard. And it does not want anyone suggesting that the insurgency is linked to the greed of the Frelimo elite, marginalisation of youths and Muslims, and growing poverty and inequality. In private, Frelimo is very clear: it wants support from individual countries and private military contractors that will provide military help and parrot the message of Islamic State terrorism. 

In particular, Frelimo does not want the involvement of international organisations such as the Southern African Development Community, the EU or United Nations, which are big enough to issue reports pointing out the root causes of the insurgency. Mozambique wants humanitarian aid, but again it wants to be in charge. The UN has been waiting for more than four months for visas for 57 humanitarian experts for Cabo Delgado, UN resident coordinator in Mozambique Myrta Kaulard said on 5 March.

Of course religion plays a role in the war. Most, but not all, of the insurgents are Muslim and the original organisers are from Cabo Delgado, including local fundamentalist Muslim preachers. President Filipe Nyusi is from Cabo Delgado and is from the Makonde ethnic group and Catholic. Nyusi has had strong support from Pope Francis, who made an unprecedented visit to Mozambique during the 2019 presidential election campaign when Nyusi was standing against a Muslim candidate, Ossufo Momade of Renamo. And on 11 February the pope withdrew the outspoken Catholic bishop of Pemba, Luis Fernando Lisboa, whom Nyusi had publicly criticised because he was standing up for local people.

It is a nasty war on all sides. Amnesty International accused the Dyck Advisory Group of war crimes, including bombing civilians by apparently using Syria-style barrel bombs made from cooking gas canisters and dropped from helicopters on houses.

And Amnesty International cited government forces for war crimes. The most extreme was in Quisanga in March and April 2020, when the “permanent secretary’s house would come to be known to villagers as a place where government security forces took women to be raped, and men detained, beaten and, in some cases, summarily executed as well. Six witnesses described a mass grave behind the home, a ‘big hole’ under the trees, where people would be taken to be shot and dumped directly in the pit.” 

Nyusi is commander in chief and is in much more direct control of his forces than the Islamic State is of al-Shabaab. And Nyusi is Catholic and the pope has intervened in the war. If we insist on citing “Islamic terrorism” because of the role of the Islamic State, should we be calling what happened in Quisanga “Christian terrorism”?

Hidden truths

In fact, neither label is correct. But again, labels are important. The 1980s civil war was in reality a Cold War proxy war, with the US backing apartheid South Africa to build up Renamo to fight the “communists” backed by the Soviet Union. Now Islam is the enemy and the US is back, fighting the Islamic State on Mozambican soil with the willing participation of Portugal and, probably, France and South Africa.

But the insurgency will not be stopped militarily. As Gonzales and many others stress, Islamist militants recruit young men with no jobs and who see no future; they stress that the government is stealing their future. Creating thousands of jobs for the poorly educated youth of Cabo Delgado would end the war, but that requires the gas companies and the Frelimo oligarchs who rule Cabo Delgado to use some of their profits to fund that job creation, and so far they have shown no interest. They would prefer the Islamic State to be blamed and that someone else fights the war.

The French company Total is developing a $20 billion gas liquefaction plant on the Afungi peninsula. Insurgents reached the gates of the project on 1 January and Total pulled out its staff. It told Mozambique it would only return when the Mozambique government could guarantee a 25km-radius secure zone around Afungi. That looks as if Total is happy to do gas production if the war can be kept out of sight. It has experience of this in Nigeria, where it has offshore wells and in the Niger Delta an insurgency has been going on for decades.

That is why labelling is so important. If this is treated as “Islamist terrorism” from the Islamic State outside of Mozambique, then Cabo Delgado will become like the Niger Delta and the war will continue indefinitely – with the gas companies in secure zones. But if jobs were created and marginalisation reduced, the war could be stopped. Sadly, it looks as if the gas companies, the Frelimo elite and the US building a new cold war would rather fight mythical global Islamist terrorists.

This article was previously published by the "Mail& Guardian"

About the Author 

COVID-19 wll have a long lasting effect in the world’s economy. According to World Bank forecasts, the global economy will shrink by 5.2% this year. The levels of unemployment around the world have also dramatically increased. This will ripple effect into other spheres of the society. Emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) are expected to shrink by 2.5% this year, their first contraction as a group in at least sixty years. Per capita incomes are expected to decline by 3.6%, which will tip millions of people into extreme poverty this year. The sociopolitical and economic urgencies brought by the impact of COVID-19 have led to a record time in the manufacturing of vaccines. It takes traditionally 5–10 years to make a vaccine . This has unfortunately created doubts on the safety of the vaccines currently on the market. Moreover, some European governments have issued statements cautioning the safety of some vaccines. French President Emmanuel Macron said on Friday that AstraZeneca’s coronavirus vaccine appeared not to be effective for people over 65 years of age. Macron said there was “very little information” available for the vaccine developed by the British-Swedish company and Oxford University. Moreover, notwithstanding assurances from pharmaceutical companies on the safety of vaccines, some of their actions have not assisted in building confidence and establishing public trust. The CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourla for an example confirmed on CNBC that he has not taken the vaccine. His rationale was that he did not want to be seen to be jumping the queue. It does not make sense; most leaders of the world including former Vice President of the US Mike Pence and the President of the US Joe Biden have taken the vaccine ahead of everyone else. Their actions were meant to establish and boast confidence on the safety of the vaccine. Bourla’s inability to take the vaccine as one of a leading manufacturers of the vaccine has added skepticism on the safety of the vaccines.

The first batch of AstraZeneca vaccines arrived in South Africa on 01 Feb from Serum Institute of India. The government of South Africa has come under pressure recently for lagging behind in rolling out the vaccines. South Africa’s reputation of being the most developed nation in Africa was undermined by a small island of Seychelles who became the first country in Africa to roll out vaccines. Seychelles, an archipelago of 115 islands off the east coast of Africa, on Sunday became the first African country to administer the Covid-19 vaccine. Seychelles aims to be the first country in the world to vaccinate 70% of the over-18-years age population in order to achieve herd immunity. This has led to considerable embarrassment for South Africa.

President of South Africa Cyril Ramaphosa was unfazed, instead he hastened to reassure the public that “no citizen will be forced to take the vaccine”. Facemasks are compulsory and failure to wear one in public may lead to imprisonment but vaccination is not compulsory? There is only one explanation to this rather confusing government decision; “government seeks to protect itself from possible litigation if anything goes wrong with vaccines” said a prominent South African politician. Ramaphosa’s assurances that citizens are not going to be forced to take the vaccine, come as increased number of people across the globe raise questions on the safety of vaccines. Moreover there have been a number of incidences where the vaccines have produced unintended results. In some instances vaccines have simply not worked. News of Chinese nationals in Luanda Angola who were re-infected after vaccination has added to mistrust of the vaccines. Reports surfaced 15 December 2021 that more than 300 workers at state-run firms in Angola and Serbia have been diagnosed with the Wuhan coronavirus despite being vaccinated with China’s vaunted vaccines. Skepticism of vaccines in general in Africa are also historical and froth with conspiracies. This is also partly what Ramaphosa was hoping to address when he said vaccinations were not going to be compulsory. One prevalent conspiracy theory, for example, holds that the Covid-19 vaccines are designed to quell Africa’s population growth. Skepticism extends to the tops of some governments too. In late January, Tanzania’s President John Magufuli dismissed Covid jabs as “dangerous for our health”. Andry Rajoelina, the president of the island state of Madagascar, has also touted an untested herbal remedy for Covid-19.

Notwithstanding skepticisms surrounding vaccines in Africa, there are also great stories of vaccinations. Recently the World Health Organisation announced that it has eradicated Polio in Africa, a great milestone made possible by mass vaccinations. On 20 August 2020, the Africa Regional Certification Commission certified the WHO African Region as wild polio-free after four years without a case. With this historic milestone, five of the six WHO regions — representing over 90% of the world’s population — are now free of the wild poliovirus, moving the world closer to achieving global polio eradication.

The desperate position most people find themselves as a result of COVID-19 will certain inspire vaccinations notwithstanding skepticisms. Moreover, at the beginning of the pandemic, related deaths and infections were very distant for many people. However with time, many people have become affected and infected by COVID-19, many have lost close relatives and friends. Consequently, there has been heightened sense of urgency to vaccinations. Moreover there are new global pressures to vaccination; countries have become strict towards visitors into their borders. COVID-19 vaccinations certificates have become compulsory and conditional to entry into many of countries. Therefore South Africans like many in the world will opt for vaccination to avoid inconveniences and interruption in their lives.

Thembisa Fakude | Senior Researcher and Director Afrasid

Thembisa holds Masters degree in Politics. He is a columnist with the Middle East Monitor in London. He is a research fellow at Al Sharq Forum in Istanbul, Turkey. He serves on the board of Common Action Forum in Madrid, Spain and on the board of Mail and Guardian publication in South Africa. He is the former Bureau Chief of Al Jazeera Media Network for Arabic and English Channels in Southern Africa

Many South Africans of my generation were born and forced into politics by apartheid. There were a number of political ideologies and organisations from which to choose when we were growing up. Whilst many of my friends embraced other forms of political ideologies I was drawn into Congress Politics, mainly because of the area I grew up in Soweto and of course family influence. Congress politics is a political ideology led by the ANC and its alliances namely South AfricanCommunist Party, Congress of South Africa Trade Unions and South African National Civic Organisations. The basic tenants of Congress politics are non-racialism and non-sexism. Those days, ideologues were expected to understand basics political principles of their preferred political ideology. It was the understanding of the ideology that “qualified” one to be a member of a particular organisation not necessarily membership fees as it later became a norm. The decision by the ANC for an example to negotiate a political settlement instead of continuing with the armed struggled in the 1990’s was intensely debated and required defending. It required a certain level of preparedness and constant reading to defend such decisions especially in absence of the organisation. The ANC and most black political organisations were banned during apartheid. Dominant political ideologies at the time were Black Nationalism, Multi-Racialism and Non-Racialism.

When the ANC adopted the Freedom Charter n 1955, it also embraced Multi-Racialism. Sizeable number of its members disagreed with Multi-Racialism advocating instead for an exclusive Black Nationalism. Those who disagreed with the organisation formed the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) on 06 April 1959. Led by Mangaliso Sobukwe, the PAC became a viable alternative to the ANC. Multi- Racialism is a racially inclusive term acknowledging all races and their differences. The term was later described as “promoting racial segregation” since it acknowledged races as separate groups. Apartheid government used it to further its separate development program arguing that different races possess different characteristics and therefore deserved to live seperately. The ANC later abandoned Multi-Racialism for Non –Racialism. Amongst the attributes of Non- racialism, are its disregard and blindness to influence of race in human capability and development. The ANC adopted Non-Racialism after a heated debate at its conference, in Morogoro, Tanzania held from 25 April to 01 May 1969.

It is this familiarity with Congress politics which led me to deviate from my normal research to writing about the appointment of Xiaomei Harvard, the first Chinese South African member of the national assembly. Second, the silence of the ANC to provide explanation in this regard also played a role to the decision. Third, the bigotry surrounding her appointment resembled that of some of the Right wing rhetoric recently heard in the US and Europe, it couldn’t be left without comment. The controversy surrounding Harvard’s appointment has created an interesting and necessary debate. Notwithstanding that answers, which could have avoided this controversy, are easily accessible on the website of the ANC. Some bigots found fodder in her appointment to paddle sexism and racism particularly on social media; Twitter was particularly unrelenting. Perhaps, before continuing with this article, it is important to first present the “easily accessible answers” to which this article earlier referred. Havard is a member of the ANC in good standing. This means she met all the requirement of being a member, complied with all explicit obligations and her membership fees are up to date. According to the constitution of the ANC “All persons not of South African origin who have manifested a clear identification with the South African people and their struggle and are resident in South Africa may apply for membership”. The ANC is guided by its constitution it also has its own unique processes. Members of parliament are selected from the ANC Candidate List based on the ANC Candidate List Guidelines. Havard stood at number 130 on the ANC Candidate List in 2019. There was no concern when her name was included in the list. Why is her name, candidacy and eligibility suddenly a talk of the town?

Simply giving the procedural justification of her nomination to the South African national assembly is not what this article intends conveying. What this article hopes to interrogate, without necessarily providing immediate answers, is to ask: what does it mean to be South African? It is an important question which deserves attention, particularly as the ANC led government continues to seek a leading role at various international platforms. The negative reception, sexist and racism leveled at Havard’s appointment will certainly impact on South Africa’s standing as a beacon of democracy. Havard might be the first South African Chinese to be appointed to the National Assembly, she is surely not going to be the last. Her appointment raises important questions regarding ANC membership and its important role as a political conduit to corridors of power. Importantly, it also raises a question about South Africans’ readiness to embrace immigrants into future leading roles. There is a growing number of dynamic South Africans of Chinese, Somali, Turkish and Ethiopians descent, to mention a few, who could play an important role in our democracy presently and in future. What will happen to their aspirations should they decide to play a role in civil services or become politicians?

The contribution of immigrants has been notably constructive particularly in the US. The former Ambassador of US in Iraq, Zalmay Mamozy Khalilzad is a naturalized citizen. Khalilzad was born in Mazar I Sharif, Afghanistan and grew up in Kabul. He represented the US at very important platforms particularly those involving war in Afghanistan. His understanding of culture and language has been of great assistance to the US. He is currently leading important discussions in Doha between the Taliban and the government of Afghanistan on behalf of the US. Another great story of a naturalized American is that of actor turned politician, Arnold Schwarzenegger. He was born in Thal in Austria. In 2003 Schwarzenegger was elected governor of California. During his tenure as the governor of California, Schwarzenegger contributed tremendously to the development of that state. In 2006 Schwarzenegger was re-elected for a second term in office as a result.

In conclusion, there is a link between the rise of Right-wing politics in various parts of the world and anti-immigration sentiments. South Africa has to be concerned about commentary raised following the appointment of Havard. The attacks on her ignored the procedures and the constitution of the ANC rather conveniently concentrated on her origin and race. Blanket rejection of immigrants could deprive this country of future meaningful contribution to all spheres of the society. At some stage the country needs to have a serious debate in this regard including preparing the next generation of the possibility of competing for positions with others who speak other languages outside the 11 national languages.

 About the author

Thembisa Fakude is a senior research fellow and director of Afrasid. He holds Masters degree in Politics. He is a columnist with the Middle East Monitor in London and a research fellow at Al Sharq Forum in Istanbul, Turkey. He serves on the board of Common Action Forum in Madrid, Spain and on the board of Mail and Guardian publication in South Africa. Thembisa is the former Bureau Chief of Al Jazeera Media Network for Arabic and English Channels in Southern Africa and former chaorpoerson of Foreign Correspondents Association of Southern Africa (FCA).