Namibia gained political independence under circumstances unlike any other Afrikan country before.
Afrikan mythology is awash with evidence that babies are given names that tell stories of the circumstances of their birth or the family’s life before the birth. Hence the refrain that Namibia is a child of international solidarity. The circumstances around Namibia’s birth can be summarised as follows:
(a) the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 435 of 29 September 1978 as the most successful United Nations process in the history of International Law, which produced a peaceful settlement amongst all participating parties, the outcome of which was that there was no winner and no loser;
(b) the 72 member Constituent Assembly comprising 7 political parties negotiated, agreed and crafted a constitution for the Republic second to none, against the background of the principles to guide the constitution writing process agreed to prior to the negotiations;
(c) the arrival of Namibia in the family of free nations occurred at a time when the world was reconfiguring in an unprecedented manner that committed the new country to constitute itself in fashions no one was able to anticipate and had to work and survive in a world with only one super power, the United States of America. This new world order denied Namibia the options other/older Afrikan states had and by which they failed;
(d) the first democratic government of Namibia inherited a country with an economy and infrastructure that (despite the war that ravaged it for many years) was the envy of many Afrikan countries and that any new leadership would wish to maintain and build upon;
(e) the Namibian political elite had a political sophistication which made it feel obligated to conduct itself in a manner that would affirm the integrity of the liberation struggle and give assurance that a black majority rule in Namibia did not mean peril to white citizens and international interests in the country, and that Namibia’s independence under SWAPO was a good laboratory for what was possible in the fear-stricken South Africa; and
(f) the independence of ‘Afrika’s last colony’ under an internationally recognised liberation movement would affirm international law by confounding doomsayers about Afrika’s leaders and allowing Namibia to become a microcosm of what all counties in Afrika and beyond wish to become, namely a home for all who lived in it.
In this respect, Namibia had done exceptionally well in its first 25 years of self-rule and as a diverse country in terms of race, language, ethnicity, religion and party political persuasions.
I would thus have assumed the leadership as the third President and Head of State of the Republic of Namibia after the November 2014 Parliamentary and Presidential Elections, with the self-understanding that I am that human being who emerged from amongst the many as the preferred candidate to lead the nation after its 25th anniversary as a country at peace with itself, at peace with its neighbours and at peace with the rest of the world.
I would be alive to the reality of very high expectations, hope, optimism and appetite for change across the land. The following is what would have followed my arrival on the political leadership scene:
VICTORY ACCEPTANCE STATEMENT:
In my victory acceptance statement, I would have set the tone of what is to come, and in accord with what I had promised during the elections campaign. I would have thanked the voters first and foremost for showing confidence in the party I represented to the extent that the votes tally indicated that more people have confidence in me than the entire membership of my party.
I would have thanked the party for its faith in my limited competencies as a leader at this crucial juncture when we need deliberate stewardship to translate our long-held noble ideas into deeds and to the best of our abilities. Thus my responsibility as leader would be to the country first, and to me and my family last.
I would have thanked my predecessors for having laid such a strong foundation and for having restored the dignity of the people of Namibia in line with what they had promised the world in 1990, and for their magnanimity to go against the scourge of Afrikan leadership, namely the unwillingness to go when their time is up.
Similarly I would have thanked the opposition party leaderships for their participation in the elections and their willingness to respect the will of the people.
I would in the same vein have lamented the weakness of opposition leaders in that they offer little proposition to make the country stronger. I would have given an example in sports: for a good athlete to shine the opposition must be of equally strong quality, otherwise winning is insignificant.
Victory in democratic elections should be judged on the basis of the strength of the loser. I would have expressed that in future, opposition would garner more strength by adding value to the governance and economic systems of the country, not just by being different or indifferent to the welfare of the nation.
I would have invited the opposition to join hands with my administration to lead a Namibia that is for all, in spite of the edifices of our past and historical differences; and that I wish to see a Namibia more upbeat and fired up to keep the momentum of the hope and optimism of the elections with more collective determination in the elegant colours of a zebra, neither black nor white but elegant and immaculate as an addition to the beauty of nature.
We have done very well under the circumstances, but could do better now that we have more information and knowledge about both our weaknesses, as well as our strengths. It is time to turn our faces towards the future and carry with us the best in us into this future.
In this regard we have an urgent responsibility to lift up those who have been left behind and out, to show and demonstrate care and towards who need it from the outstretched hand of those who have. To make life more meaningful for those who do not.
I wish to serve a Namibia where our measure is not in how powerful we look or how we look after the powerful, but how we take care of those who have been left behind by history, customs, traditions and practices – the poor, the aged, the disabled and the young who need our ears and our eyes.
I would have ended the statement with the following words: In the months and years ahead, while I have the fortuitous privilege to serve, and as long as we have the strength and resources, Namibia will take bold and deliberate decisions to make the country a better place for all.
I ask for your understanding, as I will go around the country to thank the voters and to hear the voices of the local leaders on how they see us going forward. I would like to take these few weeks to solicit the understanding and support of the people on the ground, through their leaders, that my administration will run the affairs of the nation in a ‘business unusual style’, so that we shall have to learn to do more with less, and to be built upon the foundations of democracy, such that life must become more meaningful not only for those who are privileged, but also those who still need an eye and an ear.
COUNTRYWIDE TOUR OF CONSULTATIONS
Following the elections, I would have gone on a tour of all the thirteen plus one regions to visit with regional councils, traditional authorities, youth formations and religious leaderships to learn and understand the new issues pertaining to these communities so that as a country we develop a sensitivity that one-size-fits-all formulas are not always helpful.
This sensitisation exercise is also necessary to find mechanisms to appreciate the political leadership issues on the ground and detribalise the country in the medium and long terms.
INAUGURATION ADDRESS
The moment of my inauguration would have been what it is supposed to be: a moment to pause and take stock of the long traversed road and inspire the voters to take the road less travelled, with me walking in front this time.
First of all, I would have requested the outgoing President of the Republic to issue a decree to all our officers in Foreign Affairs and far off lands that the number of Heads of State and Government invited to the inauguration be limited to selected categories, not individuals, such as the heads of SADC, the AU, EU, the UN and such organisations.
Namibia simply does not have the means to receive and look after an overwhelming number of state dignitaries with the necessary protocol costs that accompany such visits at a time when we face a drought, a failed education system, an appalling healthcare system and rampant poverty and stings of underdevelopment.
The inaugural event is for the Namibian nation to pause, regroup and redefine itself anew, and recommit the nation to the values that brought us thus far. It is not a time to show off what we do not have and in the end deserve the World Bank, the IMF and other international institutions’ designation that Namibia is a upper income country when the reality on the ground is poverty and deprivation.
…TO BE CONTINUED