Political Perspective

IT is time that Namibians start agitating for a vigorous foreign policy which has its basis in our Constitution, and most importantly, our Bill of Rights. We’ve never really had a foreign policy worth writing about, and it is high time that Namibia, as an already maturing democracy, gets its act together in this regard. It is an embarrassment, quite honestly, that we continue to be apologists for undemocratic regimes and murderous despots, when we ourselves are committed to instilling a human rights culture at home.

THE most recent example of a foreign policy blunder is the case of Sudanese President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir, a man wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC), for crimes against humanity, yet who is still ‘welcome’ here in Namibia.What is this confused logic that leads us to protect tyrants and autocratic and cruel regimes? Why do we always feel it necessary to speak for brutal leaders and even corrupt governments, yet we care nothing for the suffering masses? And isn’t it about time that the people of this country had a say in what our foreign policy should be? Hopefully all the parties contesting the election later this year will spell out to the voters just what kind of policy they propose, a policy that could actually work towards making a difference in the world!Most of us hoped that the transition of the old Organisation of African Unity (OAU) into the African Union (AU) would bring with it a different approach to Africa. That it would no longer be an exclusive club of African leaders all propping one another up despite gross abuses on the part of some of them, both in terms of cruelties to their own people and massive looting of the country’s resources. But it was not to be.Most recently Namibia was among 30 African countries which adopted a resolution in Libya to say they will not honour their obligations under the Rome statute related to the apprehension of ICC-indicted Bashir. Only Botswana openly disagreed.Al-Bashir, who himself came to power in Sudan by means of a coup in 1989, also has the dubious honour of being named in some circles as the world’s worst dictator, and despite the huge toll in human life in that country under his rule, Namibia chooses to side with people such as these.I’m surprised we didn’t eulogise the late Omar Bongo, longest-serving African leader who ruled Gabon for 41 years, shamelessly looting the country’s oil wealth and amassing a vast fortune abroad at the time of his death!Former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, recently spoke out against the AU vis-a-vis the Al-Bashir issue and the ICC and quite rightly said, among others: ‘We have little hope of preventing the worst crimes known to mankind, or reassuring those who live in fear of their recurrence, if African leaders stop support justice for the most heinous crimes just because one of their own stands accused.’It is high time Namibia start thinking about the people of Africa, rather than continuing to stand by the exclusive club of leaders, regardless of whether they are good or bad for their country, their people, and the continent as a whole. Yet few Namibians seem to care much about our record in foreign policy and human-rights related issues pertaining to Africa and the rest of the world.At least Norman Tjombe of the Legal Assistance Centre (LAC), broke the silence when he said that ‘Namibia’s endorsement of the declaration (in Libya) requires it to break its international treaty obligations and to defy the Namibian Constitution. In terms of Article 144 .. the international treaties, such as the Rome Statute, which establishes the ICC, are binding on Namibia’.He added that Namibia was obligated to co-operate with the ICC, if Al-Bashir was found on Namibian soil, whether or not it agreed with the indictment, and its endorsement of the AU decision suggests it is not to be trusted with complying with its international treaty obligations. Should it persist with its support for the AU decision, Tjombe maintained, it would do so in open defiance of its own Constitution and international treaty obligations. Echoing my own thoughts, he concludes that Namibia, because of its notable record on human rights and its history of violent oppression under apartheid, was ‘expected to side with victims of mass murder, rape, mutilation and torture; not with their tyrants and persecutors’.I would hope that, at the very least, Namibia considers a reversal of its support for the AU decision, and at best, that it discontinues its apparent policy of protecting African despots, in the very near future. Finally, that we once and for all revise a foreign policy which is bringing discredit upon our nation.