HH MUST FOLLOW WHAT HE AGREED WITH KK IN 2012 ON BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT
...We know why KK signed it and why he violated it
CONTINUATION FROM SATURDAY, JANUARY 29’S PAPER
5. Why did Kaunda quickly abolish the Barotseland Agreement after independence?
There are so many theories to this question; factors that have been advanced to explain and justify why the UNIP government of Zambia aborted and abolished the Barotseland Agreement a few months later. Below, we itemise and explain few of them:
Some people claim that Kaunda discovered that the Litunga did not have proper geographical boundaries about what he termed as his Royal territory - Lozi kingdom called Barotseland. The Lozi king is accused of claiming other people’s land everywhere without any official proof of occupation and control before colonisation.
For example, at some point, Barotseland was claimed to be stretching into Angola, DR Congo, Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana. Others claim Barotseland stretched from Chavuma up to Luangwa River and Muchinga hills.
Hence, Kaunda and his cabinet thought abolishing the Barotseland Agreement was politically safer and better for everyone to strengthen a unitary system across board.
Some people believe that after Independence, ongoing political tensions in the sub region forced Kaunda to quickly bring the entire territory called Zambia under one state and one unitary government.
Kaunda feared that oppressive minority white governments in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and Mozambique then could have antagonised and divided Zambia using other political entities.
To Kaunda, creating a formidable and powerful central government in Lusaka was the only way to guarantee national unity, secure peace and independence for both Zambia and our neighbours. This is equally important in understanding why Kaunda abolished the Barotseland Agreement first in 1965 and finally in 1969.
In addition, politics of regionalism, tribalism and ethnic nationalism started to emerge in Luapula, Eastern, Northern, North-Western, Western and Southern provinces immediately after independence. Kaunda believed sticking to the Barotseland Agreement would worsen these divisions hence abandoning it very fast.
Another school believe that Kaunda quickly abolished the Barotseland Agreement because he failed to convince the Ngoni people and king on why the Litunga was given a semi selfrule status in London during the 1964 independence negotiations and Mpezeni was not.
“Why did you sign Barotseland Agreement without Ngoniland Agreement in London?” KK could be asked by some genius Ngoni people.
After independence, it is believed that Mpezeni and some of his Ngoni people started to claim their special status like Lozi people in Zambia. Ngonis believed that they also had “a treaty” with the BSA Company and lost thousands of their subjects in the bloody Anglo-Ngoni wars of 1897-1898. Hence, keeping the Barotseland Agreement became a huge risk for KK under such political circumstances.
It is also argued that other tribes and ethnic groups outside the bigger Lozi people but within “Barotseland” did not want to be directly associated and controlled by the Litunga at Local government level.
The Mbunda, Nkoya, Sala, Luvale, Lenje, etc speaking tribes petitioned Kaunda to abandon the Barotseland agreement as they opposed the Lozi Kuta system. They just denounced the Litunga.
These non Lozi speaking ethnic groups who are the majority in the so-called Barotseland (Western Province) believed the Lusaka central government under its local government system was better, fair and neutral in meeting their developmental needs than a local monarchy system that had exploited and abused them in the past. KK faced this opposition and rejection for siding with the Litunga on the Barotseland Agreement.
Lastly, others believe that the so-called Barotseland Agreement was a selfish making of the Litunga and the British government. It is said that Kaunda was only made to sign it as the Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia. They schemed it as a precondition for independence when KK was already the Prime Minister of the entire Northern Rhodesia as one solid country.
Since Kaunda was the Prime Minister of both Barotseland North-Western Zambezi and North-Eastern Zambezi which was called Northern Rhodesia, some of his cabinet ministers persuaded him to get rid of this “unnecessary agreement” as it only represented the political interest of the Litunga and his few “Kuta” leaders.
This debate was even made worse when some freedom fighters, nationalists as well as other kings and chiefs started to question why Kaunda signed this agreement for the Litunga to have special privileges than the rest in a country the Litunga is blamed to have helped to bring imperialism and colonialism. Thus, KK was criticised and opposed for signing this agreement with the Litunga.
Under all these factors, KK and his government urgently introduced the Local Government Act of 1965 which abolished the traditional institutions that had governed Barotseland and brought the kingdom under the administration of a uniform local government system just like other kingdoms, chiefdoms and regions in Zambia.
This is what brought political healing, unity and harmony in KK’s cabinet, government and the rest of Zambia.
In 1969, Kaunda’s government arbitrary passed the Constitutional Amendment Act which abolished the Barotseland Agreement of 1964 completely. Yes, this was done without any consultations or engagements of the key stakeholders in Mongu because Kaunda was aware that their input had nothing to influence or change anything. This gesture was just formality.
6. What did Kaunda say in 2012 about Barotseland Agreement which HH agreed to?
At the peak of this Barotseland political tensions between 2010 and 2012 when Barotseland radical groups and violent activists were being hunted down, shot and arrested, Zambia’s first president was called upon to guide the country as to why he signed and later abolished the Barotseland Agreement.
I was in Germany doing my Masters’ Degree and was one of the Zambians who demanded for KK to provide leadership and direction on this matter. There was no way the Barotseland issue was boiling and fuelling like lightning and thunder with citizens dying while Kaunda was alive and made to remain mute.
In a press statement made available to the media on April 3, 2012, by office of the First President chief of staff Godwin Mfula, Zambia’s founding republican President, Dr Kenneth Kaunda finally spoke.
He said that the Barotseland impasse between Government and the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) and the Barotse National Council (BNC) required collective rational interaction and the wisdom of all Zambians (collective wisdom of Zambians).
KK didn’t say much but he clearly guided that Zambians needed to engage and dialogue on the matter in a respectful manner. “There is imperative need for a purposeful and peaceful interaction with all the stakeholders relating to the question of the Barotseland Agreement of 1964,” part of Dr Kaunda’s statement read.
In response, on April 3, 2012 in an interview with QFM Radio, UPND opposition leader then, Mr. Hakainde Hichilema thanked Dr Kenneth Kaunda’s call for genuine consultations on the Barotseland agreement and observed that what KK said was a good start.
Mr. Hichilema said the advice by the first republican president was long overdue and should be the guidance to resolving the Barotseland agreement of 1964. This President HH as an opposition leader then was in full agreement with KK’s proposal on how to resolve this matter in 2012.
So, what has changed now that he is in State House with the full voter support of the same people of Barotseland? Why is President HH not consulting and engaging key stakeholders and other informed Zambians to resolve this issue?
Why is the president now responding with political terror, military jets and authoritarian thuggery when he promised them peaceful dialogue and resolutions? Why did HH mislead and cheat the people of Barotseland during campaigns? Is it not HH who condemned President Michael Sata for failing to restore the Barotseland agreement in 2011 and 2012?
In 2022, the Vice President of Zambia, Mutale Nalumango told parliament that the UPND government was studying the Barotseland Agreement and will give its position later. People are still waiting for this promise.
Zambians and everyone want this government to give a formal position on this matter than impulsive outbursts like President HH did at Mulungushi International Conference Centre last week. Reactive statements are politically dangerous: that’s what HH did last week.
Let this president at once stop cheating, abusing, intimidating, oppressing and fooling the Litunga and his people. As KK said in 2012, the Barotseland Agreement needs collective wisdom and peaceful dialogue for all actors
Yes, HH has been clear for years that Zambia is one country and shall remain so. This is correct and commendable. But at the same time, he gave them so much hope to resolving this matter within the framework of what Kaunda guided in 2012. It’s time to walk the talk Mr President based on what KK guided and you endorsed.
7. Should Barotseland zealots supposed to discuss secession and demand independence?
The demand for secession or actualisation of independence from the rest of Zambia is both unfounded, wrong, illegal and hot political extremism. It is a demand too radical, a demand off the rails and completely baseless both politically and legally.
Since 1911, the entire territory we now call Zambia has never been treated as two separate entities because the BSA Company, our colonial powers merged the two. What existed since 1911 until 1965 was one territory with a “loose federal system” where the Litunga had special privileges at local government level like a “Supreme Council Chairperson” of Barotseland
Therefore, any reasonable discussion and meaningful demand must be anchored on these historic, legal and political facts. Anyone who comes to the table with a wrong notion that Barotseland can be separated from Zambia is both off side and must be red carded.
That is why, l believe that the Movement of the Restoration of Barotseland Agreement (MOREBA) is the best interest group and has the right agenda if any. But then, all stakeholders invited to this national dialogue on Barotseland needs to factor the basis as to why Kaunda signed it and why he immediately abolished it.
8. Conclusion
Generally, education fosters critical thinking, problem-solving abilities and enables one’s understanding in managing and improving various aspects of human life.
No Zambian President will resolve the issue of Barotseland without relying on the wheels of education through scientific approaches outside politics.
This is the mistake President Hichilema is making when he said “there is no state called Barotseland in Zambia but a province called Western Province, Zambia is a unitary state. .
While he is correct, HH just like most past Zambian presidents is relying only on old heavy politics of state arrogance, government arbitrariness and authoritarian tendencies to address and resolve a bigger national mountainous fire that needs empirical scientific analysis, historical data, diplomatic engagements, legal reviews and political solutions.
He has the solution in his face. Let President HH review what the president who signed it in 1964 and violated the Barotseland Agreement in 1965/69, Dr Kenneth Kaunda said in 2012. Moreover, HH openly supported and agreed with Kaunda 12 years ago.
Let this president at once stop cheating, manipulating, abusing, intimidating, oppressing and bullying the Litunga and his people. Their demands need honest political engagements, sober discussions, diplomatic relations and legal solutions because they have some reasonable basis. This is the hallmark of civilised leaders in all democratic countries.
*The author is a Political Scientist, Researcher, Author & Consultant specialised in Comparative Global Governance and Democratic Theories. He holds a PhD, MA, BA and Cert in Political Science. Dr Zimba was President Lungu’s Political Advisor from December 2019 to August 2021.