A-Infos (en) Southern Africa, SWAZILAND: Rush hour for liberation movement - Armed struggle a viable substitute for the mass movement?

Zabalaza Anarchist Communist Federation statement on alleged armed struggle 
tendency of Swaziland pro-democracy movement.
Recent reports in The Star (25/11/06) allege that the development of the “armed 
struggle” tendency within a section of the pro-democracy movement in Swaziland 
could be accelerating. Given that the pro-democracy movement has set itself the 
goal of liberation in 2008, it is understandable that frustration has led some 
comrades in this direction.
We do not believe that an “armed struggle” approach is appropriate. The dangers 
inherent in such an approach are many. We support the right of the oppressed to 
self-defense against repression.

However, “armed struggle” is generally not a very effective strategy. It 
substitutes a small cadre of militants for a mass movement of the workers, 
peasants and poor. Militarily, it is not very effective in confronting and 
defeating a well-entrenched regime. Buildings are replaceable, as are the 
officials and functionaries of the State. If a large section of the Royal Army 
does not join the masses, there is no real chance of the regime falling. To win 
over soldiers requires drawing them into a popular movement for

    * Democracy
    * Economic and social justice
    * People’s power

The soldiers are from the popular classes; they must join them and desert the 
ruling class.

What is also likely to happen, as it did in Lesotho, is that the SANDF could 
well invade Swaziland in order to defend South African and British investment.

It is the structure of power itself that must be challenged, not simply a few 
individuals in that structure. This can only be done by a mass movement. What is 
necessary for the people suffering under the Tinkhundla regime is to create 
organs of counter-power in the communities and workplaces that can both resist 
the existing power structure, and eventually replace the traditional authorities 
and capitalists with grassroots democracy.

Only such organs, organized and controlled by the oppressed masses, will place 
power in the hands of ordinary people, replacing the centralized power of the 
old regime with the class power of the masses. Only such a system can prevent a 
new elite emerging to take control of the existing power structure.

Armed struggle provides a ready pretext for the repression of the whole 
pro-democracy movement. Rather than act as a catalyst to propel the people into 
revolutionary action, which we believe is the intention, armed struggle acts to 
scare them away from the arena of struggle. Popular confidence and organizations 
are difficult to rebuild, yet it is only mass action that holds out the prospect 
of really changing society.

The power of the regime also lies in popular acceptance of the instruments of 
the Tinkhundla regime, such as the chieftaincy. Political conscientisation is 
crucial: the battle of ideas is more important than a few acts of sabotage. This 
is partly about challenging the existing power structure, and the ideas with 
which it clothes itself. It is also about convincing the masses that the problem 
is not just the King and the chiefs, but the capitalists and the State. That 
power must rest in the hands of the masses, not a group of leaders, whether 
traditional or otherwise. That economic democracy and social justice are just as 
important as political freedoms. An “armed struggle” lends itself to the 
military group becoming a new elite, which will create or maintain a power 
structure that places the masses at the bottom, once again.

What is needed for the liberation of Swaziland from the yoke of Royal oppression 
is a mass movement of the workers, peasants and poor, both in rural and urban 
areas. This will only come about when they have come into political 
consciousness, and the main activity of pro-democracy cadres should be in 
assisting this process until the point where sufficient numbers of the Swazi 
oppressed masses are conscious of the aims and goals of the liberation movement, 
namely social revolution. To substitute the ideas and struggles of the masses 
for their freedom with a minority insurrectionist group will jeopardize the hard 
work done by cadres in raising the level of consciousness of Swazi society thus far.

To summarize;

We wholeheartedly support the movement for freedom, justice and human dignity of 
the people of Swaziland.

We support their’ right to defend themselves and the social gains made during 
the struggle, with arms when necessary, from the repressive and violent forces 
of the state and Tinkhundla authorities.

We do not consider armed struggle to be a viable option, as the liberation 
movement at this stage appears to be insufficient in numbers, weapons and 
lacking in popular support to wage successful guerrilla warfare, and that a 
guerilla force lends itself to creating a new elite.

The struggle for democracy must not confine itself to winning limited political 
freedoms, but to creating a participatory economy planned from below, a system 
of libertarian socialism. Otherwise, the struggles of the masses are more likely 
to be used as a bargaining tool than a revolutionary one, with the basic system 
of class domination unchanged.

We maintain that the only force capable of liberating Swaziland is a mass 
movement, and that anything short of this is only likely to lead to repression, 
collaboration and, at most, limited reforms.

http://www.zabalaza.net
_______________________________________________
A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
http://ainfos.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
http://ainfos.ca/en