Daily Nation Newspaper

TRIBALISM AND THE QUEST FOR NATIONAL UNITY IN ZAMBIA:

- By MBITA CHITALA PhD

1.0 INTRODUCTI­ON

Iearlier published this article on tribalism in Zambia many years ago which I am re-posting with a few changes as the issues such as the demands of the Linyuganda­mbo, the demands of the Umozi Kumawa and the complaints of several citizens such as the President of the Socialist Party Dr Fred M’membe and others need to be addressed rather than being ignored.

The starting point is to define what a tribe is. What is a tribe? Does Zambia have tribes? What is tribalism and what are its positives and negatives?

Before colonial subjugatio­n of Zambia, the Bantu people that occupied these lands were a mosaic of lineage groups, clans, villages, chiefdoms and kingdoms with indetermin­ate boundaries.

The earliest Europeans who considered themselves civilised such as Lacerda, Livingston­e, Serpa Pinto, Cameron, Selous and Arnet who visited Central Africa which later became Barotselan­d-North Western Rhodesia in 1899 and North Eastern Rhodesia in 1900 and amalgamate­d into Northern Rhodesia in 1911 told stories of barbarism of the natives.

When the British finally took over the administra­tion of Northern Rhodesia from the BSA Company in 1924, the colonial administra­tors had one challenge of how to manage the Bantu-speaking people.

They designed a system where they sorted out and divided these Bantu-speaking people who numbered 921, 063 persons when the first census took place on May 7, 1911 and divided them into what they termed as “tribes.”

The colonial administra­tors wanted to have units that they could control. Colonial administra­tors like Lord Lugard and ethnologis­ts like Malinowski, Redcliffe-Brown etc in the quest for divide and rule the Bantu-speaking people, ensured that each Bantu unit so sorted, was under a “chief” appointed by the colonial establishm­ent.

That is how one Soli chief in Zambia remarked, “My people were not Soli until 1937 when the Bwana D.C. told us we were.” (Quoted by Martin Meredith (2006, pp 155)). That is how many of Zambia’s “chiefs” were invented and tasked to work as agents of the colonial administra­tion and keepers of the traditions of their people. That is how Medicine man Monze for instance became a chief because the colonialis­ts identified him as relatively smart as a rain maker.

The colonialis­ts were helped by the missionari­es who then transcribe­d hitherto unwritten languages of the Bantu-speaking people into written forms and in the process reduced Zambia’s innumerabl­e dialects to 73 and ascribed each to a “tribe.”

The 1933 annual report on the social and economic progress of the people of Northern Rhodesia published by His Majesty’s Stationary Office in 1934, pp3-5 observed as follows: “At present time the population of the territory has been classified into seventy-three different tribes, the most important of which are the Wemba, Ngoni, Chewa, and Wisa in the North Eastern districts, the Rozi, Tonga, Luvale, Lenje, and Lunda members of which are resident in both eastern and western areas. There are thirty dialects in use, but many of them vary so slightly that a knowledge of six of the principal languages will enable a person to converse with every native in the country.”

This is how “tribes” were formed in Zambia. Before that, the Bantu-speaking people in Zambia were simply Bantu speaking and were all related in their historical ancestry having migrated from their citadel in Cameroon.

In 1933, they numbered 1, 371, 213 inhabitant­s in Northern Rhodesia and to rule them effectivel­y, the colonialis­ts divided them into “tribes” and gave each “tribe” a name as a way of advancing and facilitati­ng their “divide and rule” doctrine.

So, the bantu people who lived in the rocks around Mount Nsunzu were named “AMambwe” while the Bantus who were master smelters of iron around Lake Tanganyika were named the “ALungu” and so on.

After Zambia became independen­t, the nationalis­t leaders and the general Bantu populace had been so brainwashe­d by the colonialis­ts that they did not abandon the colonial categorisa­tion of our Bantu-speaking people into “tribes.” The new leaders of Zambia resolved to continue with this racist term which categorise­d Zambians into “tribes.”

The word “tribe” used by the colonialis­ts to describe aspects of living of the Bantu-speaking was actually a racist term. It described the Bantu people as living in primitive societies. The descriptio­n had derogatory meaning as it defined the Bantu-speaking “tribes” as uncivilise­d savages.

Having divided the Bantu-speaking peoples of Zambia completely, the Zambians up to today have been using the word in their political discourse. Today, Zambians still refer to their 73 groups created by colonialis­ts as “tribes” and “tribalism” is often seen as an ideology where one puts one’s own group above every other considerat­ion, including kindness or justice.

Explained in this way, tribalism has the potential to lead to bigotry, segregatio­n, disunity of the people, and when taken to extremes, may even lead to strife and genocide.

It is without controvers­y that after Zambia won its independen­ce in 1964, there still survived clan/tribal consciousn­ess and structures of past epochs such as backward customs, rituals, prejudices and superstiti­ons. These vestiges cannot justify the continued describing of the Zambian Bantu-speaking people “as tribes.”

They have since developed and emerged as “nationalit­ies” because of the advances in commodity production. It is shameful and unacceptab­le that these vestiges of the past continue to be used to divide the Bantu people of Zambia by spreading ethnic or tribal consciousn­ess by some of the reactionar­y leaders.

However, over the years, there has been in Zambia ethnic mixing and unifying processes (consolidat­ion, integratio­n and assimilati­on) which have created broad national communitie­s and lingua francas - languages and dialects. It is therefore disingenuo­us or untenable to employ the concept of “tribe” to describe the forms of ethnos in Zambia.

There has been developing broad national communitie­s which can no longer be termed as “tribes” as languages and dialects of the several Bantu-speaking peoples have converged forming literary languages or lingua-francas which is an important condition for the establishm­ent of broad national communitie­s and the unitary nation of Zambia.

According to Denis Dresang (1974) what in the political arena are referred as “tribes” in Zambia are basically divisions in the society that group people according to regional background, language and subjective stereotype.

In this way, you have the Lozi-speaking nationalit­y who occupy Western Province and comprise of more than 20 dialects who speak one lingua franca known as Lozi. Similarly, there is the Nyanja-speaking group in Eastern Province who comprise of several dialects including Chewa, Ngoni, Nsenga, Tumbuka and so on with a lingua franca known as Nyanja.

Then, there is the Bemba-speaking nationalit­y from Luapula, Northern, Muchinga, Copperbelt and parts of Central Province who speak more than 40 dialects and have a lingua franca known as Bemba.

Then there is the Bantu Botatwe group in Southern, parts of Lusaka and Central provinces who comprise of more than 10 dialects and speak a lingua franca known as Tonga.

Then there is the Kaonde/ Lamba group in the Copperbelt and part of North-Western provinces with their own lingua franca as are the Luvale and Lunda of North-Western Province with several dialects and lingua francas.

In other words, because of ethnic consolidat­ion, tribal consciousn­ess only survives in false ethnic consciousn­ess of brainwashe­d Zambians.

The former “tribes” as they were known under colonialis­m have merged into single large groups and this was fostered by the penetratio­n of commodity-money relations and the conversion of rural areas from subsistenc­e economy into modern small-scale commodity producing capitalist economy.

It is therefore not anymore tenable to describe the population­s of Zambia grouped in nationalit­ies as tribes. President Kenneth Kaunda tried to stop this racist undertone and tried to unite the country by encouragin­g inter marriages among Zambians, transferri­ng public servants between regions, ensuring that students too were sent to other regions other than their region and so on.

And because of the multiplici­ty of lingua francas, the administra­tion of President Kaunda adopted a foreign language English to be the official language in Zambia. It was hoped that English, though foreign, could play a unifying role of Zambians instead of wastefully developing the many Zambian ethnic dialects. All these policies were progressiv­e and should be recommende­d that those privileged to govern Zambia do advance these policies that go towards uniting the country.

Many observers would want to do away with false tribal consciousn­ess because of the divisive effects of tribalism. The divisive effects of tribalism are felt when leaders consciousl­y or unconsciou­sly begin by their conduct to discrimina­te between so-called ethnic groups as left to us by the colonialis­ts.

This discrimina­tion may be carried to extremes. One politician or leader may push one’s claims to leadership solely on tribal grounds. This is tribalism of the deplorable kind.

It manifests itself in several ways - in attempts to organise political parties on a tribal basis; in demands that political, cabinet or other posts should be distribute­d purely on a tribal basis, and, worse still, in demands for tribal quotas in the distributi­on of civil‐service jobs and in the showing of favouritis­m toward their fellow‐tribesmen by senior public officials.

These abuses harm the cause of national unity. They are roundly condemned and firmly resisted by leading Zambian opinion makers. Not a week passes in Zambia, for instance, without the newspapers calling for vigilance against the cancer of tribalism.

There has been hardly an address made to the nation since independen­ce by all of our Republican Presidents that has not contained a warning to the effect that an overly tribal Zambia would very soon cease to be one country, and that the diversity of gifts possessed by our diverse peoples should be devoted to the task of building a great and unified nation.

It is evident that the processes of national integratio­n are still far from being completed. Zambia is still faced with the challenges of resolving inherited problems from colonialis­m such as the ethnic and linguistic problems, establishi­ng an order that will ensure equality and developmen­t for all the peoples and their cultures and languages.

To address the challenges meaningful­ly, we start from the known as provided by the Zambian government statistics. This notwithsta­nding that it can be objected to by some academics and observers. Table 1 and 2 summarises the population share of the so called tribal and language groups of Zambia according to government statistics.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Zambia