|
Community Links
------------------------------
Fofana Education Fund
G.V. Kromah
Limany
MMA
Quardu Gboni-Mandingo
Texas Mandingo
The Bility Family-USA
------------------------
News Links
BushChicken
Daily Observer-News
Front Page Africa
Global News Network
Liberian Forum
Star Radio
The Analyst-News
The Informer
The Inquirer News
The Liberan Journal
The New Democrat-News
The Perspective News
-------------------------
Resources/ Employment
Careerbuilder
JobsInMinnesota
Metro Bus Info
Metropolitan Council/Jobs
Minnesota Works
Monster
-------------------------
Government Sites
MN-Court Record
MN-Drive License/ID
State of MN
-------------------------
Other Links
Daily motions Videos
Driving directions
You tube Videos
-------------------------
|
THE POLITICIZATION OF THE MANDINGO COMMUNITY:
INTERNAL IDENTIY CRISIS; ELITISM VS GRASSROOTISM; WHO YIELDS THE
DIVIDENDS?
By: Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
05694498/pericle925@yahoo.com/www.ibrahimnyei.blogspot.com
May 13, 2009
 Ethnicity
is a critical point of rally in political situations, particularly in
Africa where ethnic politics has dominated at the expense of
nationalism. Liberian politics is a good tool for experimentation of the
test of ethnicity in African politics to be used in any political
laboratory. The first ethnic group to dominate the politics and
socio-economy of Liberia was the minority group of settlers referred to
as the Americo-Liberians. In the 1980s emerged a group of indigenous
African tribes who succeeded in violently overthrowing the Americo-Liberian
hegemony that ruled for over a century.
The new class consisting of indegionous tribes could not unite on a
front of pursuing a real political and economic agenda or ideology that
could direct political and economic actions for the country, but soon
sank into feuds stirred by ethnic alignments. Finally, the leader of the
juntas and his tribe succeeded in the fight and his ethnic group
succeeded in taking control of the state. What came after were raids,
and attempted genocides on rival tribes. The attempt by the NPFL to
physically eliminate certain tribes in the early 1990S by a declared
genocide tells the rest of the story.
Varying dimensions of ethnic politics are all over Africa: Rwanda saw
the Hutu-Tutsi horror. South Africa remains governed by black African
tribes with no prospects for white minorities. Sudan is nearly divided
into two states of Arab North and Black African South. Liberia presents
a different typology because Americo-Liberians since 1980 are becoming
assimilated into African tribes that neighbor their settlements.
Additionally, no tribe in Liberia is so dominant to secure an electoral
victory independently.
Electoral processes in Liberia, like the last one conducted in 2005, can
further give sufficient evidence of the ethnicization of Liberian
politics. In 2005, every tribe that had a popular candidate foresaw a
chance to win the presidency. Like the Bassa saw a president in
Brumskine, The Kru did in Weah, the Vai in Sherman, the Gola in Johnson-Sirleaf.
The Mandingo was a visible monkey-range resulting from inner conflicts
and the declaration of a lifetime loyalty by one of its organizations
for candidate Johnson-Sirleaf. But the Western Mandingo went the other
way and supported their son, G.V. Kromah as was demonstrated by the
overwhelming success of his party in Lofa County.
These tribal dimensions of politics in Africa lay the basis for which
politicians hide behind ethnic groups in pursuing their hidden agendas
like the Krahns and Mandingoes saw their liberators in the 1990s. Since
the civil war ended, lessons from the politicization of tribes as
thought by the war has been well learnt by other tribes. The only ethnic
organization that committed its members to a political party, and in the
name of all its kinsmen, was the National Mandingo Caucus. This
declaration of lifetime loyalty by the Caucus to the candidate of the
Unity Party, according to observers, portrayed a loathsome betrayal to
those who led liberation struggles when the tribe was nearly wiped out
by attempted genocide. This is not however the issue. This premise has
been set to give a brief look at the essence of tribes in African
politics vis-à-vis the adverse political consequences (mostly
persecution) that follow when a tribe falls on the wrong side of the
coin.
With what Liberian Mandingoes went through before reaching this far,
their professed role in the 2005 elections that was widely criticized
and seeing as an internally divided tribe, and the way forward as some
local organizations like the elite-based Mandingo Caucus ( NMC) and the
so-called grassroots-based Concerned Mandingo Society are working toward
are central to this article.
It is with no doubt that this writer declares that the Liberian
Mandingoes are most often criticized and reduced to non-citizen status
by other Liberians. This has been experienced all over the country, and
in many cases they are referred to as foreigners - Guineans or Malians.
The driving force behind this resentment has not been established, but
several factors may be assumed to be stirring such unfounded hatred
against the Mandingo tribe in Liberia.
First, there is plausibility in concluding that Mandingoes in Liberia
are despised for their uncompromising religious belief in Islam. The
Mandingo tribe has demonstrated a strong belief and commitment to Islam,
and with all the challenges of the society, it has been difficult for
them to be converted to other faiths. Therefore, as Islam is resented by
non-Muslims, the Mandingoes are as well resented. To some extent, some
people in Liberia have come to make Islam synonymous with Mandingo, and
that whosoever is a Muslim, is a Mandingo.
Second, another reason behind the public resentment of the Mandingo
tribe could be on the basis of sheer jealousy as a result of the
economic and commercial strides made by Mandingoes in the country.
Currently there is a reported dominance of certain local trade
industries by the Mandingoes – transportation, motor garage, petroleum
industry, etc.
The above are just cited as sources of external hatred for the Mandingo
community which are baseless and unfounded. This needs not to bother the
community. What the community needs is to push forward in unison with
purpose and objective.
The most important thing is the internal dispute and sometimes negative
classifications that occur within the Mandingo community, and this is
where the outsiders see as leakages in their attempts to demeaning the
Mandingoes in Liberia: there is a complete disunity amongst Liberian
Mandingoes, and the Mandingo ethnic group is the only ethnic group so
far seeing in Liberia with a well established elite organization riding
and collecting political olive branches using the name of the entire
tribe.
The most controversial and what by chance made the National Mandingo
Caucus popular in Liberia was its declaration of the vote of the
Mandingoes for candidate Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf in the 2005 presidential
elections. So many reactions have been written to that effect, and
debates have opened and closed on that matter. But the mere fact that
such declaration of support by a club of less than twenty men in the
name of thousands of innocent people nursing souls of persecutions
simply because of the same tribe was a social disservice and complete
misrepresentation tantamount to an act of quisling. No one has a moral
ground to question a club of less than twenty for their personal
political opinions, but to be brave and use the name of an ethnic group
in a country where political persecutions are targeted at tribes on the
bases of their proximity to presidents or politicians was a mournful and
dreadful political error.
Most of the arguments against the caucus at the time can now have
sufficient evidence to prove that the few guys used the tribe as canon
fodder to obtain positions and business contracts in the government of
the candidate they supported. The following are true and indubitable:
Most of them are holding positions in the current government; some of
them have government contracts; the Caucus has not been heard since
2005; it has made no representation for the Mandingo community anywhere
since they attained their objective of entering government and winning
contracts; it cannot boast of a roster with fifty registered members.
If this had happened and the community remains loosely connected or its
source of unification for purpose remains undefined, then there is a
need to revitalize, reform, remake, or design some institutional
mechanism that will give leadership direction to the entire Mandingo
nation in the Liberian state. The Mandingo nation in Liberia stretches
across the territorial landscape of the country. It is one of the few
tribes that adapt and settle nearly in all parts of the country. This
ubiquity of the tribe in the country which is primarily due to the
meaningful trade and commercial activities of its members should be seen
as a solid point of rally and strength, not as a point of division as it
is unfortunately happening. It is regrettable to observe that people
most often refer to others as Lofa Mandingo, Bong County Mandingo, Nimba
Mandingo, Monrovia Mandingo, and sometimes Gbonyiaka or Konyianka.
On the other hand, there is a considerable number of people of Mandingo
origin who are currently identified with other tribes like the Vai, the
Gbandi, The Gio, Manos, Kpelle, etc. Some of these resulted from
intermarriages. And some people who are by nature and origin Mandingo
are currently identified with tribes in settlements where their
grandparents settled during commercial or Islamic missionary activities.
These people are most often seen differently by other Mandingoes and
sometimes face serious identity crisis as a result of resentments in
their settlements and even the tribe (Mandingo) of their origin. The
Vais, for example, would refer to people in their settlements-The
Kannehs, Nyeis, Kromahs, etc- as Mandingoes, and the Mandingoes would
refer to them as Vai. The Massaley’s and Dukuly’s, like the ones from
Gbarpolu and Bomi County would be called Mandingoes by the Kpelle, and
the Mandingoes would call them Kpelles. There are many other cases of
identity crisis for people who are originally of the Mandingo tribe.
These references are made in attempts to question the true identity of
people. But what happens in the final analysis is that it further
divides the community and opens spaces of distrusts amongst members of
the Mandingo tribe.
The tribe is numerically large and economically potent to make
significant impacts in the country that no one can question or detest.
But making positive impacts can only be achievable with a untied
community fronting a common cause. Descriptions in the forms of the
regional or dialectical differences in the community are only tantamount
to weakening the strength of the community.
I n the midst of these challenges, the current social and political
discrepancies that exist in the community with two organizations
claiming supremacy or control, further frustrate the prospects of
uniting the Mandingo nation in Liberia despite its unique culture,
religious commonality and economic viability of its members. These two
organizations, the National Mandingo Caucus of Liberia (the elites) and
the Concerned Mandingo Society of Liberia or COMASL (the so-called
grassrooters) are struggling daily to terminate the existence of each
other. The COMASL which has membership in various Mandingo dominated
communities pays political loyalty to the perceived liberators of the
Mandingoes, but it did so in 2005 by actions left with the discretion of
its members, while the Caucus openly declared its loyalty to the
candidate of the Unity Party (perceived to be a supporter of the
movement that attempted a genocide against the Mandingoes). The
dividends from politically auctioning the Mandingo community in 2005 is
currently being enjoyed by the Caucus, and it is on the basis of its
political propinquity to the status quo and the financial muscles of its
members that the caucus is claiming absolute supremacy and it is now
inviting all Mandingoes to a national convention with attempts to also
merge the COMASL into the structure and objectives of its organization
either overtly or covertly. COMASL on the other hand claims supremacy on
the basis of its nearness to the people and ability to spontaneously
mobilize the people at any given time.
The struggle between the two groups is creating more distrusts in the
community as Caucus members and COMASL members are usually engaged in
destructive criticisms, but none can actually boast of a meaningful
social benefit to the people for the past two years. Does the community
actually need them, or does the community really need an umbrella
organization? The essence of their existence shall only be determined by
the Mandingo community if indeed they are engaged into meaningful
programs that yield benefits to the community, or if they actually
provide true leadership to the people.
As the Caucus convention nears, it is prudent to find common grounds and
allow for the emergence of more Mandingo organizations in the country
that must compute with development activities, but not to compute for
supremacy only to impress upon others that it has full control which
lends it the authority to determine which political movement the
Mandingo community should support when national elections nears.
We expect to see from all Mandingo organizations in the country
efficient systems of governance, social service programs, cultural
activities to unite the people, and empowerment programs that will help
the community to continue making meaningful contributions to the
development of the country.
The Gbarnga convention, as called by the National Mandingo Caucus, must
not be left with the tradition of the caucus, but must see as a priority
the need to serve the community with a sense and commitment void of
cynicism and cronyism. This convention must be able to carve out ways of
intervening and addressing some of the problems face by the Mandingo
people in Liberia, including the looming land disputes, and if possible
the mandate and function of the caucus must be clearly defined, so as to
make public its function and essence of existence. In this way, one
would easily know which organization is specialized in social services,
development activities, cultural affairs, or political activism and
mobilization in the community.
Finally we expect to sharpen lot of contradictions in Gbarnga, and to
perforate some of the balloons of impression-making and impersonation.
But above all, we hope that the Gbarnga convention will be successful
and will provide for a new beginning.
See you in Gbarnga.
|
